Thank you, hope it will work and I will test it asap. However, I am traveling and will be away from my server until Wednesday
On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 5:25 PM, Colin Watson <[email protected]> wrote: > I cannot reproduce your GRUB problems. With my fixed parted and busybox > packages applied to the running installer, I was able to do a test > installation as follows: > > {/dev/vda1, /dev/vdb1, /dev/vdc1 (spare)} -> /dev/md0 (unused) > {/dev/vda2, /dev/vdb2, /dev/vdc2 (spare)} -> /dev/md1 (ext4, /) > > (The odd device names are because I was using virtio block devices in > KVM. This shouldn't affect the outcome here; in fact if anything virtio > usually exposes additional problems.) > > GRUB was correctly installed to /dev/vda and /dev/vdb (though it might > have been nice if it had been installed to /dev/vdc too; I'm not sure > what the correct behaviour with spares is), and the resulting system > booted with no assistance. Incidentally, the installer did indeed ask > me to confirm whether I wanted to install GRUB to the MBR, and if I'd > said no to that I could have entered one or more target devices > manually. > > Your output in > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2/+bug/527401/comments/28 > clearly indicates that GRUB Legacy was used, not GRUB 2. Why this > should be the case, I don't know - we don't do this by default for RAID, > and the syslog you posted in > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2/+bug/527401/comments/37 > shows no evidence of this happening. Perhaps it was some odd side- > effect of the parted bug, not that I can think how. > > Regarding your fdisk comment in > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2/+bug/527401/comments/39, > this is quite natural and expected because partman does not use > partitioned RAID devices, but instead simply writes filesystems directly > to /dev/md*. Thus, there's nothing for fdisk to read. > > Could you please try a daily build once my two fixes so far have landed > (which should be the case by Saturday's daily build) and see what's > left? My instinct is that there was a fair amount of collateral damage > from early errors and that this has created substantial confusion. > > -- > partman and grub2 fail in server amd64 > https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/567345 > You received this bug notification because you are a direct subscriber > of the bug. > > Status in “busybox” package in Ubuntu: Fix Committed > Status in “grub2” package in Ubuntu: New > > Bug description: > Binary package hint: grub2 > > ubuntu-server-amd64 daily 20100419.1 and preceding versions fail to install > correctly > > See https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2/+bug/527401 > starting from message #24 (see also #34, where forking is suggested) > > To unsubscribe from this bug, go to: > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/busybox/+bug/567345/+subscribe > -- partman and grub2 fail in server amd64 https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/567345 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
