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

Re: LVM partitioning preseed.cfg / kickstart question



Gentle bump.  Might someone be able to assist / identify what I'm missing here?

Thanks very much,

Jim

On Tue, Mar 6, 2018, at 1:47 PM, Jim Campbell wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> I seem to be having trouble with correctly partitioning a hard drive 
> using a PXE boot + preseed file , and am seeking help.
> 
> What works:
> I can use an expert_recipe string as part of a preseed.cfg file 
> contained in a custom ISO (booted via grub-imageboot), and it correctly 
> partitions a drive with LVM.  Additionally, and I can use http-served 
> kickstart file commands like:
> 
> part /boot --fstype ext4 --size 1024 --asprimary
> part pv.01 --size 1 --grow
> volgroup linuxvg pv.01
> logvol swap   --fstype swap --vgname=linuxvg --size=6272   --name=swap
> logvol /      --fstype xfs  --vgname=linuxvg --size=80248  --
> name=root_vol
> logvol /spare --fstype xfs  --vgname=linuxvg --size=61440  --
> name=spare_vol
> logvol /home  --fstype xfs  --vgname=linuxvg --size=76800  --
> name=home_vol --grow
> 
> in an http-served ks=http://path/to/file.ks file, and it will also 
> partition the drive with LVM, but my issue is that the results between 
> the two aren't consistent, and I want to use an expert_recipe string for 
> both.  This is because the expert_recipe string allows for proportional 
> partition sizes based on the overall size of the disk.  (Note: I use the 
> "spare_vol" as a placeholder, and it gets removed in the "post" install 
> section of the installer).
> 
> Where things break down for me:
> For me, any attempt to use a kickstart / kickseed file served via http 
> with an expert_recipe string doesn't give me my desired partitions.
> 
> If I use bare d-i commands for the expert_recipe string in an http-
> served preseed.cfg file, the partitions don't get picked-up at all.
> 
> I tried doing something like (note: this partition layout uses a "spare" 
> partition which gets removed in the "post" installer section):
> 
> echo "d-i partman-auto/expert_recipe string \
>   boot-root :: \
>   1024 1024 1024 ext4 \
>   $primary{ } \
>   $bootable{ }            \
>   method{ format }        \
>   format{ }               \
>   use_filesystem{ }       \
>   filesystem{ ext4 }      \
>   mountpoint{ /boot }     \
>   . \
>   100 1000 -1 xfs         \
>   $defaultignore{ }       \
>   $primary{ }             \
>   method{ lvm }           \
>   vg_name{ linux }        \
>   . \
>   80248 80248 80248 xfs   \
>   $lvmok{ }               \
>   in_vg{ linux }          \
>   lv_name{ root_vol }     \
>   method{ format }        \
>   format{ }               \
>   use_filesystem{ }       \
>   filesystem{ xfs }       \
>   mountpoint{ / }         \
>   . \
>   6272 6272 6272 linux-swap \
>   $lvmok{ }               \
>   in_vg{ linux }          \
>   method{ swap }          \
>   lv_name{ swap_vol }     \
>   format{ }               \
>   filesystem{ swap }      \
>   .                       \
>   61440 61440 61440 xfs   \
>   $lvmok{ }               \
>   in_vg{ linux }          \
>   lv_name{ spare_vol }    \
>   method{ format }        \
>   format{ }               \
>   use_filesystem{ }       \
>   filesystem{ xfs }       \
>   mountpoint{ /spare }    \
>   . \
>   76800 76800 76800 xfs   \
>   $lvmok{ }               \
>   in_vg{ linux }          \
>   lv_name{ home_vol }     \
>   method{ format }        \
>   format{ }               \
>   use_filesystem{ }       \
>   filesystem{ xfs }       \
>   mountpoint{ /home }     \
> ."  >> /var/spool/kickseed/parse/preseed.cfg
> 
> But I wind up with partitions at /dev/sda1, /dev/sda5 - /sda9 (which I 
> don't want) instead of a primary partitions at /dev/sda1 along with a 
> bunch of /dev/mapper/ . . .  LVM partitions (which I do want). 
> 
> I've also tried including my preseed.cfg in a custom initrd.gz which is 
> out on the server, but to no avail.
> 
> I hope this all makes sense. Let me know if you have any advice or 
> additional questions.
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Jim
> 


Reply to: