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

Bug#401962: installation-reports Sun v100 / Etch RC1 Installer

Package: installation-reports
Boot method: < network rarpd/tftpd >
Image version: < http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian/dists/testing/main/installer-sparc/rc1/images/sparc64/netboot/2.6/boot.img >
Date: < 12/06/2006 >
Machine: < Sun SunFire v100>
Processor: 650mhz
Memory: 2048mb
Partitions: < n/a >
Output of lspci -nn and lspci -vnn:
[root@v100-1 ~] lspci
zsh: command not found: lspci
[root@v100-1 ~] apt-get install lspci
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree... Done
E: Couldn't find package lspci
[root@v100-1 ~]
Base System Installation Checklist:
[O] = OK, [E] = Error (please elaborate below), [ ] = didn't try it
Initial boot:           [O]
Detect network card:    [E]
Configure network:      [E]
Detect CD:              [E]
Load installer modules: [O]
Detect hard drives:     [O]
Partition hard drives:  [O]
Install base system:    [O]
Clock/timezone setup:   [O]
User/password setup:    [O]
Install tasks:          [O]
Install boot loader:    [O]
Overall install:        [O]
CD Installation:  Boots into installer from CD, but fails to detect CD-ROM drive.  Using built-in Sun v100 CD-ROM Drive.
Network Installation: (via rarpd/tftp) using Etch RC1 boot.img file, system boots, network is mis-detected as “dmfe”.  Network won’t work via DHCP, manual configuaration, etc.  Had to get to shell, and then ran following commands:
Modprobe –r dmfe
Modprobe –r tulip
Modprobe tulip
Ifconfig eth0 x.x.x.x netmask y.y.y.y
Route add default gw z.z.z.z
Echo ‘nameserver n.n.n.n” > /etc/resolve.conf
Then network-based install works properly.  
After reboot, system still prefers DMFE for networking and does not work at all, must do the same modprobe –r dmfe/tulip, then modprobe tulip, and then bring the interface up.  Can’t blacklist DMFE in udev, it still loads somehow *shrug*.  I am now rebuilding the kernel without DMFE support to see if I can just make it run with tulip.
Jared Valentine

Reply to: