On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 23:30 -0800, Sameer Verma wrote: > On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 10:37 PM, Sameer Verma <sve...@sfsu.edu> wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 8:42 PM, Martin Langhoff > > <martin.langh...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Sameer Verma <sve...@sfsu.edu> wrote: > >>> was with eth0 not showing up. It looks like I am the victim of the > >>> dreaded Realtek 8139 bug. It worked in XS 0.4 but in 0.5.1 it refuses > >>> to show up. > >> > >> Strange, but it does look like a driver problem. > >> > >> The links you provide show various different problems with that NIC. > >> In some cases, irqpoll in the kernel boot line fixes, in others some > >> fiddling with ethtool was needed... > >> > >> It'll be good to know which of the fixes helps you :-) > > > > appending irqpoll has fixed that problem. Now, I've hit another bug. > > This is yum broken with _sha256 as stated here. > > http://fedoraforum.org/forum/showthread.php?t=193507 > > > > I'm going to try the workaround. > > > >> > >> BTW, if you upgraded from XS-0.4, it might be a good idea to rm > >> /etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules > > > > No, this was a clean install. I'm running the server for testing only, > > so I can afford to wipe it clean. > > > > Sameer > > -- > > Dr. Sameer Verma, Ph.D. > > Associate Professor of Information Systems > > San Francisco State University > > San Francisco CA 94132 USA > > http://verma.sfsu.edu/ > > http://opensource.sfsu.edu/ > > > > > So, after mucking around last night and today, I wiped my XS box and > reformatted it to remove ALL traces of 0.4 I have a clean 0.5.1 > install on it. md5sum of the ISO is c0fde10b93cab3cb1a3bc3a42ceb5408 > > I've circumvented the realtek 8139 problem by appending irqpoll in > grub.conf That seems to work, although I have to bring up eth0 > manually and issuing dhcient eth0 > > I still hit the bug of _sha256 as mentioned here: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454179 > > Note that I am not upgrading anything. Its a clean install. I believe > the appropriate word for this is: AARGH! > > I wish Fedora had LTS or "Stable" branch (it does...kinda...in > RHEL...are we allowed to say CentOS here?) but that's another thread > and another rant. It does remind me of why I don't run anything on > Fedora anymore. > > Anyway, this is getting in the way. Is anyone seeing this too? If so, > then its a significant barrier for 0.5.1 > > Suggestions?
Can you post the /root/install.log and /root/anaconda.log or just send them to me. Jerry _______________________________________________ Server-devel mailing list Server-devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel