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

PXE-install fails on one of two identical setups.



This problem showed up out of nowhere, and has left me somewhat puzzled. First up, the setup:

We use PXE and TFTP to boot sarge, and preseeding to automate the installs. We have a local install mirror set up.

Here is the problem:

On one of two _identical_ setups everything works just fine. On the other, the installer fails.

The problem seems to occur during the loading of the kernel module udebs, as anna fails with "bad md5sum" right after trying to load usb-storage-modules-2.4.27-2-386-di_1.04_i386.udeb. Pressing retry results in a 416 from the install mirror, pressing retry again gives nothing on the client, but a 200 in the install mirror log. Cancelling, then selecting a different transfer protocol, which then fails, and then cancelling again and selecting the first protocol again works. We've tried using FTP and HTTP, but both protocols give the same result.

The last file fetched on the install mirror is base-installer_1.13.4_i386.udeb.

Heres is what we've tried so far, with absolutely no luck:

Using one of the official mirrors rather than our local.

Swapping the install mirror servers (which are 100% identical) between the two locations, the problem does not follow the install mirror server.

Swapping the PXE/TFTP-servers (which are 100% identical) between the two locations, the problem does not follow the PXE/TFTP-server either.

Comparing the configuration of all the servers, they are 100% identical.

Comparing the preseed-files, they are 100% identical.

Comparing the kernel and initrd.gz used, they are 100% identical.

Comparing the kernel and initrd.gz used with those from mirrors.dotsrc.org (formerly mirrors.sunsite.dk), they are 100% identical.

Comparing the network setup in the two locations, only the IPs differ.

We've probably managed to miss something entirely obvious.

Any ideas on where we should continue the investigation of this annoying problem?

/Thomas



Reply to: