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

Bug#277298: installation issue: "No partitionable media were found"



On Sat, Jan 01, 2005 at 03:31:20AM +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Saturday 01 January 2005 03:21, Asirvatham Kripps wrote:
> > I just bought a Dell poweredge SC-420 system with a 80
                                   ^^^^^^

				   mmm, another candidate for
				   bugreport #277298

> > GB SATA hard drive. When trying to install Debian
> > linux, I get a message saying "no partitionable media
> > found".
> >
> > I called Dell support and they say that Debian linux
> > doesn't support the hard drive and Red Hat Enterprise
> > version does. I hope this is not true :-(
> 
> That's bullshit (or, if you prefer, untrue).
> The question is not "does Debian support it", but "does the kernel that 
> Debian currently uses support it".
> 
> Try booting with 'linux26'.
That will work, but read on.

> However, be aware that SATA in some respects is still under development. 
> We see quite a few installation reports with problems on SATA hardware.
> Changing BIOS settings or cable connections sometimes helps.
IIRC the Dell SC420 has no such option in it is BIOS (but it is not needed,
the standard Debian 2.6 Kernel has ata_piix support)

> Things are sure to improve with time (maybe even using patches from Red 
> Hat that trickle back into the kernel sources).
Asirvatham and others don't need to wait for ata_piix support
in the 2.4 kernel, booting Debian-Installer with 'linux26' will do the
trick.

After the base install, Dell SC420 users will encounter bug #277298[1]

Meanwhile is a workaround available. For easy installation I have made
a script, fetch it with

  wget http://people.debian.org/~stappers/w/277298.sh

then run it with

  sh 277298.sh

and please confirm that it worked[2]



Cheers
Geert Stappers

[1] http:/bugs.debian.org/277298
[2] or needs some fine tuning


P.S.

Tell your hardware vendor which software you prefer.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: