Installing F26; Question about ks.cfg when raid1 is used

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
11 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Installing F26; Question about ks.cfg when raid1 is used

dwoody5654
When I boot into the install there is an error in the destination section.

I looked at the debug info in the storage.log and there was an
error about sdb1 did not exist. But...

When I reboot to F24 then ...

cat /proc/mdstat

md126 : active raid1 sda2[2] sdb2[1]
      961261568 blocks super 1.2 [2/2] [UU]
      bitmap: 2/8 pages [8KB], 65536KB chunk

md127 : active raid1 sdb1[1] sda1[2]
      15368064 blocks super 1.0 [2/2] [UU]
      bitmap: 1/1 pages [4KB], 65536KB chunk

The section of ks.cfg for hard drive setup is as follows:

ignoredisk --only-use=sda,sdb
bootloader --location=mbr --boot-drive=sda

# Partition clearing information
clearpart --none --initlabel

# Disk partitioning information

part raid.6 --fstype=mdmember --noformat --onpart=sda1
part raid.27 --fstype=mdmember --noformat --onpart=sdb1
part raid.14 --fstype=mdmember --noformat --onpart=sda2
part raid.32 --fstype=mdmember --noformat --onpart=sdb2

raid / --device=root --fstype=ext4 --level=raid1 --useexisting
raid /home --device=home --fstype=ext4 --level=raid1 --noformat --useexisting

I currently have a raid1 setup with 2 drives sda and sdb

Since I am using the option --useexisting do I still need to use the part
commands?

The last time I did an upgrade was to F24 I have not found anything that says
the syntax has changed.

Any Ideas?


David
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Installing F26; Question about ks.cfg when raid1 is used

Rick Stevens-4
On 08/09/2017 11:52 AM, D&R wrote:

> When I boot into the install there is an error in the destination section.
>
> I looked at the debug info in the storage.log and there was an
> error about sdb1 did not exist. But...
>
> When I reboot to F24 then ...
>
> cat /proc/mdstat
>
> md126 : active raid1 sda2[2] sdb2[1]
>       961261568 blocks super 1.2 [2/2] [UU]
>       bitmap: 2/8 pages [8KB], 65536KB chunk
>
> md127 : active raid1 sdb1[1] sda1[2]
>       15368064 blocks super 1.0 [2/2] [UU]
>       bitmap: 1/1 pages [4KB], 65536KB chunk
>
> The section of ks.cfg for hard drive setup is as follows:
>
> ignoredisk --only-use=sda,sdb
> bootloader --location=mbr --boot-drive=sda
>
> # Partition clearing information
> clearpart --none --initlabel
>
> # Disk partitioning information
>
> part raid.6 --fstype=mdmember --noformat --onpart=sda1
> part raid.27 --fstype=mdmember --noformat --onpart=sdb1
> part raid.14 --fstype=mdmember --noformat --onpart=sda2
> part raid.32 --fstype=mdmember --noformat --onpart=sdb2
>
> raid / --device=root --fstype=ext4 --level=raid1 --useexisting
> raid /home --device=home --fstype=ext4 --level=raid1 --noformat --useexisting
>
> I currently have a raid1 setup with 2 drives sda and sdb
>
> Since I am using the option --useexisting do I still need to use the part
> commands?
>
> The last time I did an upgrade was to F24 I have not found anything that says
> the syntax has changed.
>
> Any Ideas?

Uhm, when you're booting the install, is it possible that the CD/DVD
you're booting from becomes /dev/sda? If so, then your first hard drive
is /dev/sdb and the second is /dev/sdc and the

        ignoredisk --only-use=sda,sdb

would block using the second hard drive, since it's /dev/sdc at this
time. This is just a wild guess.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigital    [hidden email] -
- AIM/Skype: therps2        ICQ: 226437340           Yahoo: origrps2 -
-                                                                    -
-    If your broker is so damned smart...why is he still working?    -
----------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Installing F26; Question about ks.cfg when raid1 is used

dwoody5654
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 12:00:00 -0700
Rick Stevens <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 08/09/2017 11:52 AM, D&R wrote:
> > When I boot into the install there is an error in the destination section.
> >
> > I looked at the debug info in the storage.log and there was an
> > error about sdb1 did not exist. But...
> >
> > When I reboot to F24 then ...
> >
> > cat /proc/mdstat
> >
> > md126 : active raid1 sda2[2] sdb2[1]
> >       961261568 blocks super 1.2 [2/2] [UU]
> >       bitmap: 2/8 pages [8KB], 65536KB chunk
> >
> > md127 : active raid1 sdb1[1] sda1[2]
> >       15368064 blocks super 1.0 [2/2] [UU]
> >       bitmap: 1/1 pages [4KB], 65536KB chunk
> >
> > The section of ks.cfg for hard drive setup is as follows:
> >
> > ignoredisk --only-use=sda,sdb
> > bootloader --location=mbr --boot-drive=sda
> >
> > # Partition clearing information
> > clearpart --none --initlabel
> >
> > # Disk partitioning information
> >
> > part raid.6 --fstype=mdmember --noformat --onpart=sda1
> > part raid.27 --fstype=mdmember --noformat --onpart=sdb1
> > part raid.14 --fstype=mdmember --noformat --onpart=sda2
> > part raid.32 --fstype=mdmember --noformat --onpart=sdb2
> >
> > raid / --device=root --fstype=ext4 --level=raid1 --useexisting
> > raid /home --device=home --fstype=ext4 --level=raid1 --noformat
> > --useexisting
> >
> > I currently have a raid1 setup with 2 drives sda and sdb
> >
> > Since I am using the option --useexisting do I still need to use the part
> > commands?
> >
> > The last time I did an upgrade was to F24 I have not found anything that
> > says the syntax has changed.
> >
> > Any Ideas?  
>
> Uhm, when you're booting the install, is it possible that the CD/DVD
> you're booting from becomes /dev/sda? If so, then your first hard drive
> is /dev/sdb and the second is /dev/sdc and the
>
> ignoredisk --only-use=sda,sdb
>
> would block using the second hard drive, since it's /dev/sdc at this
> time. This is just a wild guess.

I am booting from an iso file from another computer. As I recall that is what
I did when I installed F24 over F22.

In the setup above it shows raid.<number> (ie. raid.6). Do you know what the
number represents? Can it be changed from one install to the next?

David
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> - Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigital    [hidden email] -
> - AIM/Skype: therps2        ICQ: 226437340           Yahoo: origrps2 -
> -                                                                    -
> -    If your broker is so damned smart...why is he still working?    -
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list -- [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Installing F26; Question about ks.cfg when raid1 is used

Gordon Messmer-2
In reply to this post by dwoody5654
On 08/09/2017 11:52 AM, D&R wrote:
> I looked at the debug info in the storage.log and there was an
> error about sdb1 did not exist. But...

Switch to VT2 (where I assume you examined storage.log) and run "ls -l
/dev/sd* /dev/md" or "lsblk" to see what block devices *do* exist.

You want to make sure that sda and sdb are the drives you expect, that
they have the expected partitions, and that /dev/md/home and
/dev/md/root exist.

> ignoredisk --only-use=sda,sdb
> bootloader --location=mbr --boot-drive=sda
>
> # Partition clearing information
> clearpart --none --initlabel

--initlabel is not required.  It only makes sense in conjunction with --all.

> Since I am using the option --useexisting do I still need to use the part
> commands?

As far as I know: no.  However, reusing existing block devices is
extremely prone to breaking and very difficult to troubleshoot, in my
experience.  You may need to experiment.  Typically, I'll start with the
anaconda-generated kickstart file from a manual installation and test
each individual change, line by line, option by option, when I'm
troubleshooting anaconda.
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Installing F26; Question about ks.cfg when raid1 is used

Rick Stevens-4
In reply to this post by dwoody5654
On 08/09/2017 12:08 PM, D&R wrote:

> On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 12:00:00 -0700
> Rick Stevens <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> On 08/09/2017 11:52 AM, D&R wrote:
>>> When I boot into the install there is an error in the destination section.
>>>
>>> I looked at the debug info in the storage.log and there was an
>>> error about sdb1 did not exist. But...
>>>
>>> When I reboot to F24 then ...
>>>
>>> cat /proc/mdstat
>>>
>>> md126 : active raid1 sda2[2] sdb2[1]
>>>       961261568 blocks super 1.2 [2/2] [UU]
>>>       bitmap: 2/8 pages [8KB], 65536KB chunk
>>>
>>> md127 : active raid1 sdb1[1] sda1[2]
>>>       15368064 blocks super 1.0 [2/2] [UU]
>>>       bitmap: 1/1 pages [4KB], 65536KB chunk
>>>
>>> The section of ks.cfg for hard drive setup is as follows:
>>>
>>> ignoredisk --only-use=sda,sdb
>>> bootloader --location=mbr --boot-drive=sda
>>>
>>> # Partition clearing information
>>> clearpart --none --initlabel
>>>
>>> # Disk partitioning information
>>>
>>> part raid.6 --fstype=mdmember --noformat --onpart=sda1
>>> part raid.27 --fstype=mdmember --noformat --onpart=sdb1
>>> part raid.14 --fstype=mdmember --noformat --onpart=sda2
>>> part raid.32 --fstype=mdmember --noformat --onpart=sdb2
>>>
>>> raid / --device=root --fstype=ext4 --level=raid1 --useexisting
>>> raid /home --device=home --fstype=ext4 --level=raid1 --noformat
>>> --useexisting
>>>
>>> I currently have a raid1 setup with 2 drives sda and sdb
>>>
>>> Since I am using the option --useexisting do I still need to use the part
>>> commands?
>>>
>>> The last time I did an upgrade was to F24 I have not found anything that
>>> says the syntax has changed.
>>>
>>> Any Ideas?  
>>
>> Uhm, when you're booting the install, is it possible that the CD/DVD
>> you're booting from becomes /dev/sda? If so, then your first hard drive
>> is /dev/sdb and the second is /dev/sdc and the
>>
>> ignoredisk --only-use=sda,sdb
>>
>> would block using the second hard drive, since it's /dev/sdc at this
>> time. This is just a wild guess.
>
> I am booting from an iso file from another computer. As I recall that is what
> I did when I installed F24 over F22.

How are you booting an ISO file from another computer? Is this a network
kickstart install, where the iso image is located on an NFS or CIFS
server?

Whatever it is, can you boot it again without invoking kickstart? If you
can, open up a command line window and do "fdisk -l", which should list
the disks the system sees. Verify the devices are the ones you think
they are. Remember that when you're booting F24 from the hard disk, you
are absolutely making /dev/sda the first hard drive. When booting from
the network, a CD/DVD or a bootp server, that may NOT be the case and
your drive letters may be different, in which the limits in your
"ignoredisk" line would prevent finding the second drive.

> In the setup above it shows raid.<number> (ie. raid.6). Do you know what the
> number represents? Can it be changed from one install to the next?

The "raid" bit of the label simply means they're to be used in a
software RAID. I have no idea why they're numbered in that manner rather
than sequentially.

Right below those "part" definitions, you see "raid" definitions where
those labels are normally used. In your case,

        raid / --device=root --fstype=ext4 --level=raid1 --useexisting

tells the system to use the first two devices in the "part" section
(/dev/sda1 and /dev/sdb1) as a RAID1, format it as ext4 and mount it at
"/". Since no partitions are specified, it uses the first two in the
"part" section. In reality, that line with all the bits specified would
be:

        raid / --device=root --fstype=ext4 --level=raid1 --useexisting raid.6
raid.27

If the partitions to use weren't sequential (e.g. you wanted to use the
first and third partitions), you'd need to specify them explicitly at
the end of the line:

        raid / --device=root --fstype=ext4 --level=raid1 --useexisting raid.6
raid.14

You should be able to rename the labels in your ks.cfg if you wish, but
again if your RAID definition doesn't use sequential partitions, make
sure you specify them appropriately. The labels have no significance
outside of Anaconda/kickstart as far as I know.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigital    [hidden email] -
- AIM/Skype: therps2        ICQ: 226437340           Yahoo: origrps2 -
-                                                                    -
-       Charter Member of the International Sarcasm Society          -
-                "Yeah, like we need YOUR support!"                  -
----------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Installing F26; Question about ks.cfg when raid1 is used

Gordon Messmer-2
On 08/09/2017 02:27 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
> Right below those "part" definitions, you see "raid" definitions where
> those labels are normally used. In your case,
>
> raid / --device=root --fstype=ext4 --level=raid1 --useexisting
>
> tells the system to use the first two devices in the "part" section
> (/dev/sda1 and /dev/sdb1) as a RAID1, format it as ext4 and mount it at
> "/". Since no partitions are specified, it uses the first two in the
> "part" section.

Is that documented somewhere?  I've never seen that behavior described
in the kickstart documentation, and I was curious enough to test it.  If
I provide a "raid" specification with no partitions, installation of
CentOS fails with an error that reads "Partitions required for raid".

I didn't test Fedora, but the documentation for the "raid" command in
both appears to be the same.
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Installing F26; Question about ks.cfg when raid1 is used

Rick Stevens-4
On 08/09/2017 04:02 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:

> On 08/09/2017 02:27 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
>> Right below those "part" definitions, you see "raid" definitions where
>> those labels are normally used. In your case,
>>
>>     raid / --device=root --fstype=ext4 --level=raid1 --useexisting
>>
>> tells the system to use the first two devices in the "part" section
>> (/dev/sda1 and /dev/sdb1) as a RAID1, format it as ext4 and mount it at
>> "/". Since no partitions are specified, it uses the first two in the
>> "part" section.
>
> Is that documented somewhere?  I've never seen that behavior described
> in the kickstart documentation, and I was curious enough to test it.  If
> I provide a "raid" specification with no partitions, installation of
> CentOS fails with an error that reads "Partitions required for raid".

You have to have at least two "part raid.somenumber" lines to create a
RAID1, and a "raid" line to define the type of RAID, filesystem type
and mountpoint.

> I didn't test Fedora, but the documentation for the "raid" command in
> both appears to be the same.

Have a look at:

        https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/7/html/Installation_Guide/sect-kickstart-syntax.html

(that URL is all one line, your mail client may wrap it).

Scroll down to the "part" section and also the "raid" section. For a
more advanced example:

        https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/7/html/Installation_Guide/sect-kickstart-examples.html#sect-kickstart-partitioning-example

(again, all one line)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigital    [hidden email] -
- AIM/Skype: therps2        ICQ: 226437340           Yahoo: origrps2 -
-                                                                    -
-                 IGNORE that man behind the keyboard!               -
-                                                - The Wizard of OS  -
----------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Installing F26; Question about ks.cfg when raid1 is used

Gordon Messmer-2
On 08/09/2017 06:14 PM, Rick Stevens wrote:
>
> You have to have at least two "part raid.somenumber" lines to create a
> RAID1, and a "raid" line to define the type of RAID, filesystem type
> and mountpoint.

I did.  I used a kickstart that was as close to D&R's snippet as possible.

> Have a look at:
>
> https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/7/html/Installation_Guide/sect-kickstart-syntax.html

Yeah, that's the platform I tested.  It definitely does not work as you
described.  At least not in my tests.  As far as I can tell, you *must*
specify the partitions unless you are reusing an existing RAID device.
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Installing F26; Question about ks.cfg when raid1 is used

dwoody5654
In reply to this post by Rick Stevens-4
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 14:27:07 -0700
Rick Stevens <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 08/09/2017 12:08 PM, D&R wrote:
> > On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 12:00:00 -0700
> > Rick Stevens <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >  
> >> On 08/09/2017 11:52 AM, D&R wrote:  
> >>> When I boot into the install there is an error in the destination
> >>> section.
> >>>
> >>> I looked at the debug info in the storage.log and there was an
> >>> error about sdb1 did not exist. But...
> >>>
> >>> When I reboot to F24 then ...
> >>>
> >>> cat /proc/mdstat
> >>>
> >>> md126 : active raid1 sda2[2] sdb2[1]
> >>>       961261568 blocks super 1.2 [2/2] [UU]
> >>>       bitmap: 2/8 pages [8KB], 65536KB chunk
> >>>
> >>> md127 : active raid1 sdb1[1] sda1[2]
> >>>       15368064 blocks super 1.0 [2/2] [UU]
> >>>       bitmap: 1/1 pages [4KB], 65536KB chunk
> >>>
> >>> The section of ks.cfg for hard drive setup is as follows:
> >>>
> >>> ignoredisk --only-use=sda,sdb
> >>> bootloader --location=mbr --boot-drive=sda
> >>>
> >>> # Partition clearing information
> >>> clearpart --none --initlabel
> >>>
> >>> # Disk partitioning information
> >>>
> >>> part raid.6 --fstype=mdmember --noformat --onpart=sda1
> >>> part raid.27 --fstype=mdmember --noformat --onpart=sdb1
> >>> part raid.14 --fstype=mdmember --noformat --onpart=sda2
> >>> part raid.32 --fstype=mdmember --noformat --onpart=sdb2
> >>>
> >>> raid / --device=root --fstype=ext4 --level=raid1 --useexisting
> >>> raid /home --device=home --fstype=ext4 --level=raid1 --noformat
> >>> --useexisting
> >>>
> >>> I currently have a raid1 setup with 2 drives sda and sdb
> >>>
> >>> Since I am using the option --useexisting do I still need to use the part
> >>> commands?
> >>>
> >>> The last time I did an upgrade was to F24 I have not found anything that
> >>> says the syntax has changed.
> >>>
> >>> Any Ideas?    
> >>
> >> Uhm, when you're booting the install, is it possible that the CD/DVD
> >> you're booting from becomes /dev/sda? If so, then your first hard drive
> >> is /dev/sdb and the second is /dev/sdc and the
> >>
> >> ignoredisk --only-use=sda,sdb
> >>
> >> would block using the second hard drive, since it's /dev/sdc at this
> >> time. This is just a wild guess.  
> >
> > I am booting from an iso file from another computer. As I recall that is
> > what I did when I installed F24 over F22.  
>
> How are you booting an ISO file from another computer? Is this a network
> kickstart install, where the iso image is located on an NFS or CIFS
> server?

yes, it is nfs mounted. I have read and reread the doc and in one place it says
to point to an install tree another place it says iso or install tree. I tried
both and neither worked.

In fact, after I tried a number of changes as I understood the doc I got worse
results.

I then changed to using a flash drive attached to the computer I am upgrading
and got to the installer before it crashed. Doing alt-f3 I printed out some
info. It is as follows:
=============================================================
brw-rw---- 1 root disk 8,  0 Aug 10 19:04 /dev/sda
brw-rw---- 1 root disk 8,  1 Aug 10 19:04 /dev/sda1
brw-rw---- 1 root disk 8,  2 Aug 10 19:04 /dev/sda2
brw-rw---- 1 root disk 8, 16 Aug 10 19:04 /dev/sdb
brw-rw---- 1 root disk 8, 17 Aug 10 19:04 /dev/sdb1
brw-rw---- 1 root disk 8, 18 Aug 10 19:04 /dev/sdb2
brw-rw---- 1 root disk 8, 32 Aug 10 19:04 /dev/sdc
brw-rw---- 1 root disk 8, 33 Aug 10 19:04 /dev/sdc1
brw-rw---- 1 root disk 9, 126 Aug 10 19:04 /dev/md126
brw-rw---- 1 root disk 9, 127 Aug 10 19:04 /dev/md127

/dev/md:
total 0
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 8 Aug 10 19:04 home -> ../md127
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 8 Aug 10 19:04 root -> ../md126

lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 8 Aug 10 19:04 /dev/md/root -> ../md126
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 8 Aug 10 19:04 /dev/md/home -> ../md127

NAME        MAJ:MIN RM   SIZE RO TYPE  MOUNTPOINT
loop0         7:0    0   2.2G  1 loop  /run/install/repo
loop1         7:1    0 392.4M  1 loop  
loop2         7:2    0     2G  1 loop  
|-live-rw   253:0    0     2G  0 dm    /
`-live-base 253:1    0     2G  1 dm    
loop3         7:3    0   512M  0 loop  
`-live-rw   253:0    0     2G  0 dm    /
sda           8:0    1 931.5G  0 disk  
|-sda1        8:1    1  14.7G  0 part  
| `-md126     9:126  0  14.7G  0 raid1
`-sda2        8:2    1 916.9G  0 part  
  `-md127     9:127  0 916.7G  0 raid1
sdb           8:16   1 931.5G  0 disk  
|-sdb1        8:17   1  14.7G  0 part  
| `-md126     9:126  0  14.7G  0 raid1
`-sdb2        8:18   1 916.9G  0 part  
  `-md127     9:127  0 916.7G  0 raid1
sdc           8:32   1  14.5G  0 disk  
`-sdc1        8:33   1  14.5G  0 part  /run/install/isodir

-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 2401239040 Jul  5 21:47 /run/install/isodir/Fedora-Server-dvd-x86_64-26-1.5.iso

-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 6527 Aug 10 17:01 /run/install/isodir/ks.cfg
==============================================================================

It appears to have located all the drives and raid instances as well as the
iso file and the ks.cfg file

Is there any other info that would be useful to get?

David

>

> Whatever it is, can you boot it again without invoking kickstart? If you
> can, open up a command line window and do "fdisk -l", which should list
> the disks the system sees. Verify the devices are the ones you think
> they are. Remember that when you're booting F24 from the hard disk, you
> are absolutely making /dev/sda the first hard drive. When booting from
> the network, a CD/DVD or a bootp server, that may NOT be the case and
> your drive letters may be different, in which the limits in your
> "ignoredisk" line would prevent finding the second drive.
>
> > In the setup above it shows raid.<number> (ie. raid.6). Do you know what
> > the number represents? Can it be changed from one install to the next?  
>
> The "raid" bit of the label simply means they're to be used in a
> software RAID. I have no idea why they're numbered in that manner rather
> than sequentially.
>
> Right below those "part" definitions, you see "raid" definitions where
> those labels are normally used. In your case,
>
> raid / --device=root --fstype=ext4 --level=raid1 --useexisting
>
> tells the system to use the first two devices in the "part" section
> (/dev/sda1 and /dev/sdb1) as a RAID1, format it as ext4 and mount it at
> "/". Since no partitions are specified, it uses the first two in the
> "part" section. In reality, that line with all the bits specified would
> be:
>
> raid / --device=root --fstype=ext4 --level=raid1 --useexisting raid.6
> raid.27
>
> If the partitions to use weren't sequential (e.g. you wanted to use the
> first and third partitions), you'd need to specify them explicitly at
> the end of the line:
>
> raid / --device=root --fstype=ext4 --level=raid1 --useexisting raid.6
> raid.14
>
> You should be able to rename the labels in your ks.cfg if you wish, but
> again if your RAID definition doesn't use sequential partitions, make
> sure you specify them appropriately. The labels have no significance
> outside of Anaconda/kickstart as far as I know.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> - Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigital    [hidden email] -
> - AIM/Skype: therps2        ICQ: 226437340           Yahoo: origrps2 -
> -                                                                    -
> -       Charter Member of the International Sarcasm Society          -
> -                "Yeah, like we need YOUR support!"                  -
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list -- [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Installing F26; Question about ks.cfg when raid1 is used

Gordon Messmer-2
On 08/10/2017 01:36 PM, D&R wrote:
> /dev/md:
> total 0
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 8 Aug 10 19:04 home -> ../md127
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 8 Aug 10 19:04 root -> ../md126


Good.  Try removing the "ignoredisk", "clearpart", and "part" lines from
your kickstart file.
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Installing F26; Question about ks.cfg when raid1 is used

dwoody5654
On Thu, 10 Aug 2017 14:03:46 -0700
Gordon Messmer <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 08/10/2017 01:36 PM, D&R wrote:
> > /dev/md:
> > total 0
> > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 8 Aug 10 19:04 home -> ../md127
> > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 8 Aug 10 19:04 root -> ../md126  
>
>
> Good.  Try removing the "ignoredisk", "clearpart", and "part" lines from
> your kickstart file.

Did as you suggested. It initialized the video and after a couple of lines
stopped displaying anything on the screen. I waited for several minutes before
doing ctrl-alt-delete

David
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list -- [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Loading...