Re: RH9 upgrade to FC3 fails with Adaptec I2O ZCR raid

Eric Wagar
2005-06-04T16:16:58Z

>>>> I attempted to upgrade my RH9 (2.4.20-37.9) system to FC3 (2.6.9 I
>>>> believe is the release on the CDs).
>>>> I was able to get into Anaconda (by adding the I2O Block driver at the
>>>> "add Driver" screen) and to the section where I chose either a Fresh
>>>> install or an upgrade.
>>>> The first time I reached that point, the upgrade portion specified the
>>>> hdb (sdb) drive, which is my "backup" drive. The drive I need to
>>>> upgrade is hda (sda). I then power cycled the system and removed the
>>>> sdb drive to make sure nothing on that drive is touched.
>>>> I reached the same Fresh or Upgrade point, and this time the hda
>>>> (/dev/i2o/hda8) drive showed properly. I chose upgrade, and this
>>>> error
>>>> appears:
>>>> Error mounting device sda8 as /: No such file or directory
>>>
>>> Hmmm, think there is some problem with the partition naming...
>>> One 2.4.x kernel you most likely used the dpt_i2o module, but on
>>> 2.6.x kernel the default is the i2o_block module... So the device
>>> names change from /dev/sdaX to /dev/i2o/hdaX... I don't know for
>>> sure, but probably in /etc/fstab there are device names instead of
>>> labels. Something like:
>>> ...
>>> /dev/sda8 / ext2 defaults
>>> 1 0
>>> ...
>>> And because the device names change FC3 couldn't mount /dev/sda8
>>> anymore...
>>
>> The current fstab is:
>> /dev/sda8 / ext3 defaults 1 1
>> /dev/sda1 /boot ext3 defaults 1 2
>> /dev/sda7 /usr/local ext3 defaults 1 2
>> /dev/sda2 /var/lib/mysql ext3 defaults 1 2
>> /dev/sda5 /var/log/httpd ext3 defaults 1 2
>> /dev/sda6 /var/www ext3 defaults 1 2
>> /dev/sda3 swap swap
>> defaults 0 0
>
>
> OK...
>
>> Since I was not successful on the install, I did not add/change the
>> /dev/sda# to /dev/i2o/hda#. (Device names do change from /dev/sdL# in
>> RH to /dev/i2o/hdL# in FC3+.)
>
>
> The problem with changing /etc/fstab is, if the upgrade doesn't work
> for some reason you won't be able to boot into the "old" system
> without changing it back...
>
> But i would guess that it will work, if you change it before upgrading...
>
>> In my pay job I am don't have the ability to use LABEL on a
>> partition. Are you thinking I may be able to change the /dev/sda# to
>> LABEL and
>> install that way? Since the Fresh and the Upgrade install "found" the
>
>
> After the upgrade you have to be carefull with labels, because if you
> also load i2o_scsi you could access each disk of the RAID array. In
> case of RAID-1 you finally have 3 disks with the same label, which
> could break your whole system...
>
>> drive successfully, I wouldn't think that Anaconda reads the fstab.
>> (I'm not familiar with Anaconda, so my logic could be wrong.)
>
>
> Hmmm, i couldn't say for sure, but the /dev/sda8 must come from
> somewhere... Are you sure that the "dpt_i2o" and "i2o_scsi" module is
> not loaded? Because both would provide access to /dev/sda8...

Do I determine this during the upgrade by going to Alt-F2 (I think it
is) and doing a lsmod? And, if they are loaded, should I modprobe one
or both out?

Are there different SCSI RAID that are better supported than the ZCR?
If so, which ones?

>>>> Press OK to reboot your system.
>>>> The only action at this point is to push the "OK" button for the
>>>> reboot.
>>>> I select "OK" and reboot to get back to the Fresh or Upgrade point,
>>>> and
>>>> chose Fresh this time. I did verify that the partitions shown are
>>>> hda{1-8}, with all sizes correct but no mount points specified.
>>>> I did not go any further.
>>>> The system has a 2010S ZCR Adaptec card with 2x36G RAID1 config, and a
>>>> 36G standalone drive (so three cards). It is a SuperMicro 6023P-8R
>>>> with
>>>> 2x2.4G Xeon and 1G RAM.
>>>> Since FC3 disk has 2.6.9, I didn't put the i2o_block into the CD's
>>>> because the i2o webpage shows that it is already in the 2.6.8. (I do
>>>> see that some people have posted on the i2o website that they have had
>>>> successful installs.)
>>>> Currently the system is up with RH9 still on it. I'd like to get FC3+
>>>> installed, but I can't seem to figure out what piece I am missing.
>>>> Any one give me some pointers? Are there any alternatives to getting
>>>> FC3+ installed? Unfortunately, don't look for immediate trial, as
>>>> this
>>>> system is the only one I have. I don't have a test system with the
>>>> same
>>>> config. Why?!, that'd be too easy! :)
>>>
>>>
>>> Could you verify if this is true?
>>
> This most likely means this partition has not been formatted.

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list