Re: Dead-in-the-water
I did download the diagnostic and ran several of them.
They did not reveal the problem. The problem has happened
less often and I continued to try to install. The netinst
images for etch must have real problems. I switched back
to sarge and I was able to get quite a ways into the installation.
Now I have the system running but the configuration is not
complete. I get fatal errors from the base-config script.
Several required packages seem to be missing.
Richard
On Mon December 26 2005 04:19, you wrote:
> Hello Richard
>
> Have the exact same system, Seems to remember, that you need to enable the
> DVD for boot before install. Use the "add boot" option from EFI menu. Have
> you downloaded the latest firmware and boot CD from www.hp.com? You can
> also load the diag CD from there.
>
>
> Regards
>
> Lars Holm
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Harke [mailto:rharke@earthlink.net]
> Sent: 26. december 2005 07:14
> To: debian-ia64@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Dead-in-the-water
>
> I have a HP ZX2000. Normally I lhave been leaving it running but
> I shut down a few days ago.When I booted it, I was able to login
> but when I did a startxit apparently reset. Then it went into the boot
> sequence again. After that I had a lot of trouble with re-booting.
>
> I opened the case and did a good job of cleaning out dust. Now its slightly
> more stable but it still wouldn't boot because it wouldn't get past the
> file system check. Message was to enter root passwd for maintenance
> but keyboard wasn't working. Went to recovery system on HP CD
> Couldn't find a valid file system. Decided to do a complete re-install.
>
> I was able to boot debian net install but it won't install because it can't
> find the CDROM. Suggests I do net install instead. But this is the net
> install
> (ETCH beta)
>
> Also tried the "newer" image for etch. Get a message that there is no
> kernel on the CD
>
> Could these last issues still be hardware and if so what is the prime
> suspect?
> Or did th debian site have a problem?
>
> Richard Harke
Reply to: