On Sat, 25 May 2019 16:08:02 -0700
stan wrote:
> Hi,
> I pulled the server net install iso for rawhide, the future Fedora 31,
> and tried to install it. I used custom install with existing
> partitions on a bios partitioned disk. It refused to install because
> it wanted gpt and uefi.
>
> I swa
On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 11:12 AM stan wrote:
>
> On Thu, 30 May 2019 11:50:20 -0700
> Samuel Sieb wrote:
>
> > On 5/30/19 9:52 AM, stan wrote:
> > > # mount -t vfat /dev/sda8 /mnt/to_efi
> > > mount: /mnt/to_efi: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock
> > > on /dev/sda8, missing codepage or he
On Thu, 30 May 2019 11:53:43 -0600
Chris Murphy wrote:
> That's a useful size for experimenting with systemd-boot, which
> expects kernels + initramfs and BLS snippets to all go on the EFI
> system partition. The Fedora installer's default for the EFI system
> partition is around 200MiB, and the
On Thu, 30 May 2019 11:50:20 -0700
Samuel Sieb wrote:
> On 5/30/19 9:52 AM, stan wrote:
> > # mount -t vfat /dev/sda8 /mnt/to_efi
> > mount: /mnt/to_efi: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock
> > on /dev/sda8, missing codepage or helper program, or other error.
>
> Check the journal to see
On Thu, 30 May 2019 12:04:31 -0600
Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 10:53 AM stan wrote:
> >
> > # mount -t vfat /dev/sda8 /mnt/to_efi
> > mount: /mnt/to_efi: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock
> > on /dev/sda8, missing codepage or helper program, or other error.
>
> # blk
On 5/30/19 9:52 AM, stan wrote:
# mount -t vfat /dev/sda8 /mnt/to_efi
mount: /mnt/to_efi: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/sda8,
missing codepage or helper program, or other error.
Check the journal to see if there is any more info.
Also, run "file -s /dev/sda8" to see what is
On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 10:53 AM stan wrote:
>
> # mount -t vfat /dev/sda8 /mnt/to_efi
> mount: /mnt/to_efi: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/sda8,
> missing codepage or helper program, or other error.
# blkid
# dosfsck -avn /dev/sda8
--
Chris Murphy
__
On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 10:17 AM stan wrote:
> On Wed, 29 May 2019 21:41:13 -0600
> Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> > That would cause both fc30 and fc31 to boot with the same kernel
> > options in common except for the root which is explicitly set in the
> > *conf file. I haven't tested how the *conf fi
On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 12:53 PM stan wrote:
>
> So, I decided to go for the UEFI install after creating an EFI system
> partition on the drive.
>
> Number Start (sector)End (sector) Size Code Name
>1 2097152 4194303 1024.0 MiB 8300
>2 4194304
On Thu, 30 May 2019 09:38:12 -0700
stan wrote:
> On Wed, 29 May 2019 12:12:12 -0700
> Samuel Sieb wrote:
>
> Progress report:
>
> I deleted the mbr using gdisk, and put the proper type on the existing
> linux partitions, and the install succeeded. I think it was failing
> to install because t
On Wed, 29 May 2019 12:12:12 -0700
Samuel Sieb wrote:
Progress report:
I deleted the mbr using gdisk, and put the proper type on the existing
linux partitions, and the install succeeded. I think it was failing to
install because the installer was confused by the labels on the existing
linux par
On Wed, 29 May 2019 21:41:13 -0600
Chris Murphy wrote:
Thanks for the detailed response. That's complicated, and I've saved it
for future reference; I'll need to let it settle for a while before
reading it again.
> No symlinks on FAT.
>
> As complicated as it seems, the way forward for two or
On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 9:28 PM Samuel Sieb wrote:
>
> The /boot/efi partition is a FAT-formatted partition that is specially
> marked for the firmware to find. It is possible for the grub configs to
> be there, but Fedora doesn't put them there. That's how it has been
> until now. I don't know
On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 8:32 PM stan wrote:
>
> On Tue, 28 May 2019 13:46:11 -0700
> Samuel Sieb wrote:
>
> I'm still exploring BLS and UEFI, so the questions below might be naive.
It is confusing because there's an upstream bootloaderspec that
originated along with gummiboot bootloader which be
On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 2:46 PM Samuel Sieb wrote:
> The /boot partition can be anywhere. I generally don't even create a
> separate partition, it's just included in /. But if you're wanting to
> share it, it would need to be separate.
Or mount Fedora n-1 root (somewhere in /run ?) and then bi
On Wed, 29 May 2019 12:12:12 -0700
Samuel Sieb wrote:
> Please use the fdisk output instead. Partition type names are much
> more useful than numbers.
Device StartEndSectors Size Type
/dev/sda1 2097152419430320971521G Linux filesystem
/dev/sda2 4194304
On 5/29/19 11:52 AM, stan wrote:
> Number Start (sector)End (sector) Size Code Name
> 1 2097152 4194303 1024.0 MiB 8300
> 2 4194304 6291455 1024.0 MiB 0700
> 3 629145648234495 20.0 GiB8200
> 448234496
On Tue, 28 May 2019 20:28:16 -0700
Samuel Sieb wrote:
> (I
> really need to install a system to see how this really works.)
Yeah, I decided that I wanted to install this as UEFI with BLS to see
how everything works together. Reading just isn't the same.
> If both installs are using BLS, the
On 5/29/19 8:15 AM, Ian Pilcher wrote:
On 5/28/19 10:28 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
The /boot/efi partition is a FAT-formatted partition that is specially
marked for the firmware to find. It is possible for the grub configs
to be there, but Fedora doesn't put them there. That's how it has
been un
On 5/28/19 10:28 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
The /boot/efi partition is a FAT-formatted partition that is specially
marked for the firmware to find. It is possible for the grub configs to
be there, but Fedora doesn't put them there. That's how it has been
until now. I don't know for sure where th
On 5/28/19 7:36 PM, stan wrote:
On Tue, 28 May 2019 13:59:07 -0700
Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 5/28/19 1:04 PM, stan wrote:
On Mon, 27 May 2019 22:27:16 -0600
Chris Murphy wrote:
On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 3:55 PM stan wrote:
And, if
I install as UEFI, for some reason it doesn't accept the existin
On 5/28/19 7:31 PM, stan wrote:
On Tue, 28 May 2019 13:46:11 -0700
Samuel Sieb wrote:
The /boot partition can be anywhere. I generally don't even create a
separate partition, it's just included in /. But if you're wanting
to share it, it would need to be separate.
I just got into the habit
On Tue, 28 May 2019 13:59:07 -0700
Samuel Sieb wrote:
> On 5/28/19 1:04 PM, stan wrote:
> > On Mon, 27 May 2019 22:27:16 -0600
> > Chris Murphy wrote:
> >> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 3:55 PM stan wrote:
> >>> And, if
> >>> I install as UEFI, for some reason it doesn't accept the existing
> >>>
On Tue, 28 May 2019 13:46:11 -0700
Samuel Sieb wrote:
I'm still exploring BLS and UEFI, so the questions below might be naive.
> On 5/28/19 1:23 PM, stan wrote:
> > On Tue, 28 May 2019 10:26:10 -0600
> > Chris Murphy wrote:
> >> One possible gotcha is the boot volume needs to be big enough. F
On Mon, 27 May 2019 22:27:16 -0600
Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 3:55 PM stan wrote:
> The installation failure needs a bug report with all the installer
> logs attached, and a description of reproduce steps, and the before
> and after state.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bu
On 5/28/19 1:04 PM, stan wrote:
On Mon, 27 May 2019 22:27:16 -0600
Chris Murphy wrote:
On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 3:55 PM stan wrote:
And, if
I install as UEFI, for some reason it doesn't accept the existing
ext4 partitions on the gpt formatted drive.
What do you mean by it didn't accept them?
On 5/28/19 1:23 PM, stan wrote:
On Tue, 28 May 2019 10:26:10 -0600
Chris Murphy wrote:
One possible gotcha is the boot volume needs to be big enough. For a
few releases it's been 1GiB which probably is big enough for two
Fedora's to share, because we don't use kdump by default whereas I
guess i
On 5/28/19 1:26 PM, stan wrote:
I added this disk to a system that was all BIOS, many years ago, and
didn't want the hassle of dealing with this new thing UEFI. The fact
that my system would be held hostage to a shim from Microsoft didn't sit
well with me, either, though that is probably irratio
On Mon, 27 May 2019 22:06:32 -0600
Chris Murphy wrote:
> Boot from it again and run
>
> # efibootmgr -v
>
> And report the output.
# efibootmgr -v
EFI variables are not supported on this system.
___
test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Mon, 27 May 2019 15:31:28 -0700
Samuel Sieb wrote:
> If you have a GPT formatted disk, why aren't you using UEFI?
>
> You can still do a BIOS install to a GPT formatted drive. You just
> need to create a BIOS boot partition (not /boot) which is what the
> installer should be telling you.
I
On Tue, 28 May 2019 10:26:10 -0600
Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 9:09 AM Richard Ryniker
> wrote:
> >
> > Chris Murphy wrote on Mon, 27 May 2019
> > 22:27:16 -0600:
> > >Dual Fedora's isn't officially supported. The installer almost
> > >always steps on the previous Fedora's bo
On Mon, 27 May 2019 22:27:16 -0600
Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 3:55 PM stan wrote:
> > It ran for
> > over 20 minutes at almost 100% CPU and didn't complete. So, I
> > killed it.
> The installation failure needs a bug report with all the installer
> logs attached, and a d
On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:49 PM stan wrote:
>
> On Mon, 27 May 2019 10:57:54 -0700
> Samuel Sieb wrote:
>
> > No, that is something that is specified by the sending domain,
> > zoho.com in this case. Probably the mailing list admins should add
> > that domain to the list of domains that it rewr
On Mon, 27 May 2019 10:57:54 -0700
Samuel Sieb wrote:
> No, that is something that is specified by the sending domain,
> zoho.com in this case. Probably the mailing list admins should add
> that domain to the list of domains that it rewrites addresses from.
Thanks.
Is there something I can do
e
On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 9:09 AM Richard Ryniker wrote:
>
> Chris Murphy wrote on Mon, 27 May 2019 22:27:16
> -0600:
>
> >Dual Fedora's isn't officially supported. The installer almost always
> >steps on the previous Fedora's bootloader making it unbootable, in
> >favor of a new bootloader for
Chris Murphy wrote on Mon, 27 May 2019 22:27:16 -0600:
>Dual Fedora's isn't officially supported. The installer almost always
>steps on the previous Fedora's bootloader making it unbootable, in
>favor of a new bootloader for the new Fedora installation.
This deserves some attention. I expect to
On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 3:55 PM stan wrote:
> It seems that the above won't be necessary, as I must have originally
> formatted the drive as GPT, and forgotten I'd done so.
>
> I was able to switch the firmware to strictly BIOS from UEFI/BIOS
> hybrid, with UEFI preferred. That allowed the insta
On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 3:03 PM stan wrote:
>
> On Mon, 27 May 2019 11:43:20 -0600
> Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> > On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 11:19 AM Adam Williamson
> > wrote:
> >
> > >Either you aren't writing your install media and/or
> > > booting them quite the same as you did before,
> >
> > Yep
On 5/27/19 2:54 PM, stan wrote:
Can I actually somehow do a UEFI install to this disk, preserving the
existing Fedora and being able to boot to it directly?
You can't use the grub config file from the old install, but you might
be able to boot it if you add entries pointing to the files there.
On 5/27/19 3:07 PM, stan wrote:
I think the last time I did a fresh install, I must have been using
BIOS on a BIOS formatted disk. This time, I was able to disable UEFI,
but then discovered that the disk was formatted with GPT, and that
caused problems for the installer. The media isn't the pro
On Mon, 27 May 2019 10:18:43 -0700
Adam Williamson wrote:
> Right. Nothing has changed in the media here AFAIK. If you boot from
> the firmware to the Fedora install media in a UEFI-native way, the
> installer will boot UEFI-native and require you to do a UEFI-native
> install. If you boot from t
On Mon, 27 May 2019 12:04:58 -0600
Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 11:27 AM stan wrote:
> >
> > Yes, the firmware is UEFI. But, the hard drives have been in use
> > with older hardware that wasn't. My understanding is that it is
> > difficult and chancy to convert from legacy par
On Mon, 27 May 2019 11:43:20 -0600
Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 11:19 AM Adam Williamson
> wrote:
>
> >Either you aren't writing your install media and/or
> > booting them quite the same as you did before,
>
> Yep, I often forget this detail. How was the install media create
On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 11:27 AM stan wrote:
>
> On Mon, 27 May 2019 10:00:02 -0600
> Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> > That you get GRUB from installation media tells me your computer is
> > presenting itself as having UEFI firmware, because on computers with
> > BIOS firmware the installation media wil
On 5/27/19 10:26 AM, stan wrote:
On Mon, 27 May 2019 10:00:02 -0600
Chris Murphy wrote:
Authentication-Results: mx.google.com;
arc=fail (body hash mismatch);
spf=pass (google.com: domain of
test-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org designates 209.132.181.2 as
permitted sender) smtp.m
On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 11:19 AM Adam Williamson
wrote:
>Either you aren't writing your install media and/or
> booting them quite the same as you did before,
Yep, I often forget this detail. How was the install media created,
exactly? Quite a lot of methods recreated partitions and bootloader
st
On Mon, 27 May 2019 10:00:02 -0600
Chris Murphy wrote:
> That you get GRUB from installation media tells me your computer is
> presenting itself as having UEFI firmware, because on computers with
> BIOS firmware the installation media will use isolinux as the
> bootloader, not GRUB. If the firmwa
On Mon, 2019-05-27 at 10:00 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 8:20 AM stan wrote:
> > On Sun, 26 May 2019 23:20:08 -0700
> > Samuel Sieb wrote:
> >
> > > If you are booting in UEFI mode, then yes, they are required. If you
> > > don't want that, you need to boot in legacy or
On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 8:20 AM stan wrote:
>
> On Sun, 26 May 2019 23:20:08 -0700
> Samuel Sieb wrote:
>
> > If you are booting in UEFI mode, then yes, they are required. If you
> > don't want that, you need to boot in legacy or CSM mode.
>
> Thanks for the tip. That enables me to see the prob
On Sun, 26 May 2019 23:20:08 -0700
Samuel Sieb wrote:
> If you are booting in UEFI mode, then yes, they are required. If you
> don't want that, you need to boot in legacy or CSM mode.
Thanks for the tip. That enables me to see the problem, but not how to
correct it. The boot stanza for the i
On 5/25/19 4:08 PM, stan wrote:
Hi,
I pulled the server net install iso for rawhide, the future Fedora 31,
and tried to install it. I used custom install with existing partitions
on a bios partitioned disk. It refused to install because it wanted gpt
and uefi.
I swap back and forth between pred
51 matches
Mail list logo
