Re: Cannot upgrade from FC6->F7. No upgrade option given in install screen.

Thank's Jim for responding to my post.

Please forgive me for not posting details sooner.

In the interim I've done a number of things none of which were successful
in getting F7 to prompt for and install or upgrade options.

I did some more fiddiling with both parted and fdisk. I also noticed some
unusual behaviour between the two programs. I printed the parition
table an noticed that /dev/hdd4 was displayed with an ID of 0 which
indicates
empty. However, i seem to recall that last year when I was fiddiing with
software
raid that /dev/hdd4, the extended parition, contained hdd5 and hdd6 which
were used to test
software raid. So I added another primary parition on /dev/hdd4 to clear
that entry or
any remnants of old info from the software raid. I ran sfdisk -l and no
more reports of
/dev/md0.

However, that didn't solve the problem. I still do not see any screen
prompting me
for and install or upgrade after I received the Searching for installation
or before the "Partition Type" screen.

This morning I upgraded 29 rpms on FC6 including the kernel which I thought
might help
the situation. Nada. I've attempted to remove the /dev/md0 device by
deleting it via rm.
Of course it was deleted however, upon reboot the device was again present.

I checked to see if the two daemons associated with the mdadm package,
mdmonitor and mdrdp(sp?), are running and they are off.

The instructions you included in your post only removes the "physical" drive
or partition
from the raid array denoted by /dev/md<num>. I checked the docs and mdadm
doesn't
include any method for deleting a raid array. (maybe I missed something.)

I found something yesterday in that mdadm has "misc" commands one of which
is
a zero superblock on an attached raid parition. Another individual was
having
similar problems as I had described and apparently he used that to
completely
zero the superblock and anaconda presented the upgrade screen which he did
not receive prior to these raid remnants.

Unfortunately, I had deleted those two old partitions, as well as the
extended partition
and then just added a primary fourth partition on the /dev/hdd drive, again
assuming
that the software raid/lvm remnants were causing the problem. However,
since
partition 4,5 and 6 no longer exist mdadm will no longer work on those
paritions.

I then used gpart to see if it would detect deleted partitions. Nada.

Any other ideas as to what to do.

Thank you.

Regards,
Lou Spironello


I've included more config files and output below.

/boot/grub/grub.conf
<snip>

default=0
timeout=5
splashimage=(hd0,0)/grub/splash.xpm.gz
hiddenmenu
#title Fedora Core ( 2.6.20-1.2944.fc6xen)
# root (hd0,0)
# kernel /xen.gz- 2.6.20-1.2944.fc6
# module /vmlinuz-2.6.20-1.2944.fc6xen ro root=LABEL=/ rhgb quiet
max_loop=16
# module /initrd-2.6.20-1.2944.fc6xen.img
title Fedora Core (2.6.18-1.2798.fc6)
root (hd0,0)
kernel /vmlinuz-2.6.18-1.2798.fc6 ro root=LABEL=/ rhgb quiet
max_loop=16
initrd /initrd-2.6.18-1.2798.fc6.img

</snip>
==========
# sfdisk -l

<snip>

Disk /dev/hda: 19929 cylinders, 255 heads, 63 sectors/track
Units = cylinders of 8225280 bytes, blocks of 1024 bytes, counting from 0

Device Boot Start End #cyls #blocks Id System
/dev/hda1 * 0+ 24 25- 200781 83 Linux
/dev/hda2 25 6086 6062 48693015 83 Linux
/dev/hda3 6087 12166 6080 48837600 83 Linux
/dev/hda4 12167 19928 7762 62348265 5 Extended
/dev/hda5 12167+ 12410 244- 1959898+ 82 Linux swap / Solaris
/dev/hda6 12411+ 19928 7518- 60388303+ 83 Linux

Disk /dev/hdc: 116301 cylinders, 16 heads, 63 sectors/track
Units = cylinders of 516096 bytes, blocks of 1024 bytes, counting from 0

Device Boot Start End #cyls #blocks Id System
/dev/hdc1 0+ 40634 40635- 20480008+ 83 Linux
/dev/hdc2 40635 81269 40635 20480040 83 Linux
/dev/hdc3 81270 116300 35031 17655624 83 Linux
/dev/hdc4 0 - 0 0 0 Empty

Disk /dev/hdd: 238216 cylinders, 16 heads, 63 sectors/track
Units = cylinders of 516096 bytes, blocks of 1024 bytes, counting from 0

Device Boot Start End #cyls #blocks Id System
/dev/hdd1 0+ 194 195- 98248+ 83 Linux
/dev/hdd2 195 116452 116258 58594032 83 Linux
/dev/hdd3 116453 209265 92813 46777752 83 Linux
/dev/hdd4 209266 238215 28950 14590800 83 Linux
</snip>
==========
# blkid

<snip>
# blkid
/dev/hdb: LABEL="rescue Disc" TYPE="iso9660"
/dev/hdd3: LABEL="hdd3" UUID="218acaa4-4778-4a9b-be33-18f3b3646396"
SEC_TYPE="ext2" TYPE="ext3"
/dev/hdd2: LABEL="hdd2" UUID="f28f151c-5963-48be-8281-1b674094c428"
SEC_TYPE="ext2" TYPE="ext3"
/dev/hdd1: LABEL="hdd1" UUID="df29a431-ec30-4114-8202-035b0f6f3114"
SEC_TYPE="ext2" TYPE="ext3"
/dev/hdc3: LABEL="hdc3" UUID="b54505bd-c8c3-401a-8708-c72b38552bb8"
SEC_TYPE="ext2" TYPE="ext3"
/dev/hdc1: LABEL="hdc1" UUID="d81d7541-80cf-404d-bc0d-21fda2473752"
SEC_TYPE="ext2" TYPE="ext3"
/dev/hdc2: LABEL="hdc2" UUID="424d61f6-c4e9-43cb-bbf8-51eb38eea3b5"
SEC_TYPE="ext2" TYPE="ext3"
/dev/hda6: LABEL="/home" UUID="9122da36-fcf9-482c-978e-14219f46d0ac"
SEC_TYPE="ext2" TYPE="ext3"
/dev/hda5: LABEL="SWAP-hda5" TYPE="swap"
/dev/hda3: LABEL="/usr" UUID="7bdfe636-fa05-4b00-8e64-1a7ca3cb41a9"
SEC_TYPE="ext2" TYPE="ext3"
/dev/hda2: LABEL="/" UUID="38e17b63-7a70-4d26-9b7c-e5cdda9064a1"
SEC_TYPE="ext2" TYPE="ext3"
/dev/hda1: LABEL="/boot" UUID="d24b169a-8d91-4e9c-9821-205ac9cf0b42"
SEC_TYPE="ext2" TYPE="ext3"
/dev/hdd4: LABEL="hdd4" UUID="c11b4d0e-b30a-492b-9303-982513fa7c38"
SEC_TYPE="ext2" TYPE="ext3"
</snip>


On 6/4/07, Jim Cornette < fc-cornette@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Lou Spironello wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Jim Cornette wrote:
>> Lou Spironello wrote:
>>> Thanks Jim for the idea.
>>>
>>> Did that and still no option to install/upgrade, or detection of
>>> fc6 before the partition screen.
>>>
>>> Regards, Lou
>>>
>>>
>> Could it be that for some reason the installer does not encounter a
>> fedora-release package so it refuses to upgrade the system. This
>> happened to me once and no upgrade option was provided.
>>
>>
>> So check your installation for upgrade and verify that
>> fedora-release is installed. If it is installed and verifies, it
>> must be something to do with not recognizing your hard disk, so
>> back to the hunt.
>>
>> Jim
>>
> Parted shows the culprit at the bottom:
>
> (parted) print devices
> /dev/hda (164GB)
> /dev/hdc (60.0GB)
> /dev/hdd (123GB)
> /dev/md0 (0.00B)

I'm not familiar with setting up raid or removing raid. Would rm
/dev/md0 remove the raid information from the disk? Or could you choose
the md0 device using the select feature of parted?

I'm curious and this is not at all recommended advice.

Jim


Excerpt from info parted:

2.4.15 select
-------------

-- Command: select DEVICE
Selects the device, DEVICE, for Parted to edit. The device can be
a Linux hard disk device, a partition, a software RAID device or
LVM logical volume.

Example:

(parted) select /dev/hdb

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

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

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Cannot upgrade from FC6->F7. No upgrade option given in install screen. (and RAID remnant)
    ... I forgot to add that during the upgrade I got a power failure! ... with the raid device /dev/md0 mdadm will not operate on that device. ... CD and I eventually received the install / upgrade window! ... >> the disk. ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: Help me to install RAID pls
    ... 30 to 50 GB partition for your SBS, and install the first CD. ... drivers from the mobo cd or a fresh download. ... can partition just as if there was only 1 physical drive in the system. ... rest of the partitions where raid must be on. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: win98 upgrade
    ... behind from the upgrade. ... To do a clean install, either boot the Windows 2000 install CD-Rom or setup ... existing partition, If you press D to delete an existing partition, you must ...
    (microsoft.public.win2000.general)
  • Results of my Dapper Install
    ... I decided to start my upgrade experiences ... initial load of needed services to install - OK ... Automatic partition ...
    (Ubuntu)
  • Re: Problems with upgrading from ME to Windows 2000 Pro
    ... ME cannot be "upgraded" with Windows 2000. ... They could both be on C: and that will cause problems also if you use both OS' on the same partition. ... > Had a nightmare trying to upgrade ME to Windows 2000 Pro. ... > I tried both the recommended install (i.e., ...
    (microsoft.public.win2000.setup_upgrade)