On Mon, 2003-05-05 at 07:52, Keith Owens wrote:
> On Sun, 04 May 2003 21:20:50 -0600,
> "D. Stimits" <stimits@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >To name the hard drive as the installer source, does the iso image not
> >have to be mounted on loopback first? It isn't really a hard drive
> >source when it is just an iso image. [I'm probably missing part of the
> >conversation]
>
> The hard disk directory was built by copying the contents of redhat 9
> install CDs 3, 2, 1 plus the rh 9 XFS install CD, in that order. That
> is what is required for an nfs, ftp or http install, see README on rh
> install CD 1. That README does not say what format is required for a
> hard disk install so I assumed it was the same as NFS etc.
>
> The messages I got on install only listed vfat and ext2 mount attempts.
> I saw no attempts to mount the partition as xfs, no error messages and
> no successful mount messages. This is what makes me think that the xfs
> module was not loaded. Pity here was no shell on alt-f2, otherwise I
> could have confirmed my hypothesis.
I don't think it will be possible to have install source as an
existing xfs partition. The xfs module lives in the stage2.img which of
course is what the installer is looking for either via ftp, http, nfs,
hard drive... etc.
EXT2 is build into the boot kernel and there for is available for
hard drive image installs. XFS would either have to built into the boot
kernel (kernel won't fit on a floppy) or possible supplied from a driver
disk (easier but still non trivial to make work).
Personally I don't think anybody here is going to try and make install
from existing xfs partition work.
Additionally for whatever reason the upgrade detector seems to be broken
so the installer won't recognize your RH install.
I'm sure the fix is trivial but trying to debug from the install
environment it a real pain so we haven't spent much time on it.
If anybody does fix the problem please send a patch and I'll rebuild the
installer iso.
-Russell Cattelan
|