Bug 431895

Summary:	http and ftp installation broken on x86_64 and ppc
Product:	[openSUSE] openSUSE 11.1	Reporter:	Martin Mrazik <mmrazik>
Component:	Installation	Assignee:	E-mail List <yast2-maintainers>
Status:	RESOLVED DUPLICATE	QA Contact:	Jiri Srain <jsrain>
Severity:	Major
Priority:	P5 - None	CC:	dmacvicar, mantel
Version:	Beta 2
Target Milestone:	---
Hardware:	Other
OS:	Other
Whiteboard:
Found By:	---	Services Priority:
Business Priority:		Blocker:	---
Marketing QA Status:	---	IT Deployment:	---
Attachments:	linuxrc log

Description Martin Mrazik 2008-10-03 10:23:20 UTC

Created attachment 243315 [details]
linuxrc log

I'm trying to install build002 x86_64 using the following linuxrc arguments:

initrd=/find/openSUSE-11.1-Build0002-DVD-x86_64/boot/i386/loader/initrd install=http://cml.suse.cz/netboot/find/openSUSE-11.1-Build0002-DVD-x86_64 splash=silent minmemory=128 ramdisk_size=73728 vga=0x314 LinuxrcLog=/linuxrc.log  BOOT_IMAGE=/find/openSUSE-11.1-Build0002-DVD-x86_64/boot/i386/loader/linux


the http repository exists and I can access it using my browser. i386 installation with similar arguments works fine so I don't think this is an error of the local setup in Prague. If you need any further logs, please let me know. DVD installation works fine.

Comment 1 Martin Mrazik 2008-10-03 10:33:00 UTC

I almost forgot. The installation ends with the following error:

Could not find the openSUSE Repository.
Activating manual setup program.

Comment 2 Duncan Mac-Vicar 2008-10-06 10:15:05 UTC

What is the content of http://cml.suse.cz/netboot/find/openSUSE-11.1-Build0002-DVD-x86_64 ?

Can you paste an ls?

Comment 3 Martin Mrazik 2008-10-06 11:41:58 UTC

[its from firefox, but I hope its still readble; if not, please let me know]

 Parent Directory                                      -   
[   ] ARCHIVES.gz                      02-Oct-2008 16:22  7.1M  
[   ] ChangeLog                        02-Oct-2008 16:22  7.4M  
[TXT] EULA.txt                         02-Oct-2008 16:14   13K  
[TXT] GPLv2.txt                        02-Oct-2008 16:14   18K  
[TXT] GPLv3.txt                        02-Oct-2008 16:14   34K  
[   ] INDEX.gz                         02-Oct-2008 16:22   34K  
[   ] README                           02-Oct-2008 16:14  1.6K  
[   ] README.BETA                      02-Oct-2008 16:18  1.5K  
[   ] README.DOS                       02-Oct-2008 16:14  1.7K  
[IMG] SuSEgo.ico                       02-Oct-2008 16:14  2.2K  
[   ] autorun.inf                      02-Oct-2008 16:14   52   
[DIR] boot/                            02-Oct-2008 16:31    -   
[   ] content                          02-Oct-2008 16:18   16K  
[TXT] content.asc                      02-Oct-2008 16:18  189   
[   ] content.key                      02-Oct-2008 16:14  1.0K  
[TXT] control.xml                      02-Oct-2008 16:14   48K  
[   ] directory.yast                   02-Oct-2008 16:22  478   
[DIR] docu/                            02-Oct-2008 16:14    -   
[DIR] dosutils/                        02-Oct-2008 16:14    -   
[TXT] gpg-pubkey-0dfb3188-41ed929b.asc 02-Oct-2008 16:14  877   
[TXT] gpg-pubkey-3d25d3d9-36e12d04.asc 02-Oct-2008 16:14  1.7K  
[TXT] gpg-pubkey-7e2e3b05-4816488f.asc 02-Oct-2008 16:14  1.0K  
[TXT] gpg-pubkey-9c800aca-481f343a.asc 02-Oct-2008 16:14  2.1K  
[TXT] gpg-pubkey-56b4177a-47965b33.asc 02-Oct-2008 16:14  1.0K  
[TXT] gpg-pubkey-307e3d54-481f30aa.asc 02-Oct-2008 16:14  613   
[TXT] gpg-pubkey-a1912208-446a0899.asc 02-Oct-2008 16:14  1.8K  
[   ] license.tar.gz                   02-Oct-2008 16:14  5.4K  
[   ] ls-lR.gz                         02-Oct-2008 16:22   67K  
[DIR] media.1/                         02-Oct-2008 16:22    -   
[   ] openSUSE-release.prod            02-Oct-2008 16:18   70   
[   ] pubring.gpg                      02-Oct-2008 16:14  6.1K  
[DIR] suse/                            02-Oct-2008 16:13    -

Comment 5 Steffen Winterfeldt 2008-10-06 14:21:46 UTC

The log in fact shows the problem quite clearly, you just have to look
at it. :-)

see bug 428924 & bug 431861

Comment 6 Hubert Mantel 2008-10-07 15:17:30 UTC

Shouldn't we set this to "resolved duplicate" then? Am I missing something obvious?

Comment 7 Duncan Mac-Vicar 2008-10-07 15:34:34 UTC


*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 431861 ***