[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#241073: marked as done (hppa sarge CD netinst fails on 715/100 (segfault))



Your message dated Tue, 13 Jul 2004 12:34:12 -0400
with message-id <20040713163412.GA4746@kitenet.net>
and subject line closing report
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 30 Mar 2004 15:58:48 +0000
>From wooledg@eeg.ccf.org Tue Mar 30 07:58:48 2004
Return-path: <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org>
Received: from pat.ccf.org (imadev.eeg.ccf.org) [192.35.79.70] 
	by spohr.debian.org with smtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 1B8LdY-0005dt-00; Tue, 30 Mar 2004 07:58:48 -0800
Received: (qmail 5652 invoked by uid 563); 30 Mar 2004 15:58:17 -0000
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 10:58:17 -0500
From: Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org>
To: submit@bugs.debian.org
Subject: hppa sarge CD netinst fails on 715/100 (segfault)
Message-ID: <20040330155816.GE301@eeg.ccf.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 
	(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.0 required=4.0 tests=HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no 
	version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
X-Spam-Level: 

Package: installation-reports

Debian-installer-version: http://gluck.debian.org/cdimage/testing/daily/hppa/20040329/sarge-hppa-netinst.iso
uname -a: N/A (never makes it to a shell)
Date: Tue Mar 30 10:44:59 EST 2004
Method: 'boot scsi.2.0' (external SCSI CD-ROM with the ISO burned on a CD-R)

Machine: HP 715/100
Processor: PA-RISC 1.1
Memory: 160 MB
Root Device: internal SCSI hard disk (but never makes it that far)
Root Size/partition table: N/A (never makes it that far)
Output of lspci: N/A

Base System Installation Checklist:

Initial boot worked:    [E]
Configure network HW:   [ ]
Config network:         [ ]
Detect CD:              [ ]
Load installer modules: [ ]
Detect hard drives:     [ ]
Partition hard drives:  [ ]
Create file systems:    [ ]
Mount partitions:       [ ]
Install base system:    [ ]
Install boot loader:    [ ]
Reboot:                 [ ]
[O] = OK, [E] = Error (please elaborate below), [ ] = didn't try it

Comments/Problems:

I have a lot of old HP PA-RISC machines lying around, so I thought I'd
try to help get the sarge installer tested on hppa.  I know it's not
yet considered to be "working".

I downloaded <http://gluck.debian.org/cdimage/testing/daily/hppa/20040329/sarge-hppa-netinst.iso>
onto a local computer (HP-UX 10.20, with a DVD burner in it), and burned
it to a CD-R.  Then I assembled an old HP 715/100, with an external SCSI
CD-ROM, monitor/keyboard/mouse, and network transceiver+cable.  I booted
the machine and hit ESC to get the firmware menu/prompt.

At the firmware prompt, I typed 'search scsi' to see what names the
devices were using, then 'boot scsi.2.0' to boot the CD.

Linux booted properly, but after a few seconds I got the following errors:

Setting up filesystem, please wait ..
umount: /initrd: Invalid argument
Segmentation fault
Segmentation fault
Segmentation fault

The "Segmentation fault" messages repeated for as long as I cared to let
them, one every few seconds on average.  Hitting the (soft) power button
caused Linux to shut down gracefully and power off.

I repeated this procedure with the same result.

The suggestion to use 'DEBCONF_PRIORITY=low' was made in IRC, but I don't
know precisely how to *do* that.  I tried booting the CD with
'boot scsi.2.0 DEBCONF_PRIORITY=low' but it made no visible difference.

---------------------------------------
Received: (at 241073-done) by bugs.debian.org; 13 Jul 2004 16:34:44 +0000
>From joey@kitenet.net Tue Jul 13 09:34:44 2004
Return-path: <joey@kitenet.net>
Received: from kitenet.net [64.62.161.42] (postfix)
	by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 1BkQEu-0000El-00; Tue, 13 Jul 2004 09:34:44 -0700
Received: from dragon.kitenet.net (216-98-91-107.access.naxs.com [216.98.91.107])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(Client CN "Joey Hess", Issuer "Joey Hess" (verified OK))
	by kitenet.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A45918308
	for <241073-done@bugs.debian.org>; Tue, 13 Jul 2004 16:35:11 +0000 (GMT)
Received: by dragon.kitenet.net (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id 251DF6EE8E; Tue, 13 Jul 2004 12:34:13 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 12:34:12 -0400
From: Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>
To: 241073-done@bugs.debian.org
Subject: closing report
Message-ID: <20040713163412.GA4746@kitenet.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="W/nzBZO5zC0uMSeA"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040523i
Delivered-To: 241073-done@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 
	(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no 
	version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
X-Spam-Level: 


--W/nzBZO5zC0uMSeA
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I'm closing this report as it is reported fixed in beta4.

--=20
see shy jo

--W/nzBZO5zC0uMSeA
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA9A8Ed8HHehbQuO8RAm38AKDIlKXCCZqH77rGTln4g0iO3/wpmwCgn604
DnMq9jFkzm60zhJT8D/BnrQ=
=smQl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--W/nzBZO5zC0uMSeA--



Reply to: