Hi, all!
Sorry if this is offtopic, but I don't know where I can found answer.
I rebuild RHEL4 for x86_64 from source. I create install CDs iso and try install it. All packets installed success. But after this, when "Install boot loader" (grub) I get error from anaconda (see attaches).
I can not found resolve for this problem in inet. :(
How I can fix it problem?
Thanks.
Andrew Velikoredchanin wrote:
danieldk@pobox.com:
How I can fix it problem?
By using CentOS :).
We already have our i686 version of distro based on RHEL4. Now we try create x86_64 version and have this problem. :(
the error message is quite descriptive, trace that. its either one of your patches, or a missing package ( related to the bootloader setup ) that is missing.
even if you dont know python, have a look and trace the variables down in that file. anaconda is nice like that - and you can even run anaconda in debug mode.
Based on the following list it seems that Oracle's new Unbreakable Linux is really based on Centos and not rhel. Any comment on this?
http://oss.oracle.com/linux/legal/oracle-list.htnl
Look at the "artwork" rpm.
-Connie Sieh
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Connie Sieh wrote:
Based on the following list it seems that Oracle's new Unbreakable Linux is really based on Centos and not rhel. Any comment on this?
http://oss.oracle.com/linux/legal/oracle-list.html
it is .html, small typo ;-)
as for the rest: explicit.....
Look at the "artwork" rpm.
-Connie Sieh _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 11:21:02AM -0500, "Ing. Ernesto Pérez Estévez" wrote:
Connie Sieh wrote:
Based on the following list it seems that Oracle's new Unbreakable Linux is really based on Centos and not rhel. Any comment on this?
http://oss.oracle.com/linux/legal/oracle-list.html
it is .html, small typo ;-)
as for the rest: explicit.....
The hell with oracle. The least they could do is acknowledge CentOS. But I suppose that would be expecting too much of them.
[]s
- -- Rodrigo Barbosa "Quid quid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur" "Be excellent to each other ..." - Bill & Ted (Wyld Stallyns)
I really do not know if it is based on CentOS or not. I just see the CentOS name in the rpm list.
I am downloading the release now. Very very very slow download so have not been able to look at it yet.
-Connie Sieh On Thu, 26 Oct 2006, Rodrigo Barbosa wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 11:21:02AM -0500, "Ing. Ernesto Pérez Estévez" wrote:
Connie Sieh wrote:
Based on the following list it seems that Oracle's new Unbreakable Linux is really based on Centos and not rhel. Any comment on this?
http://oss.oracle.com/linux/legal/oracle-list.html
it is .html, small typo ;-)
as for the rest: explicit.....
The hell with oracle. The least they could do is acknowledge CentOS. But I suppose that would be expecting too much of them.
[]s
Rodrigo Barbosa "Quid quid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur" "Be excellent to each other ..." - Bill & Ted (Wyld Stallyns)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFFQOKfpdyWzQ5b5ckRAr3dAJ9154OgjgtXx8X5ZrGhJU6o9no1HACdFxva iSN+VngSEvKibQp7V1jpLc8= =AC0l -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
On Thu, 2006-10-26 at 11:32 -0500, Connie Sieh wrote:
I really do not know if it is based on CentOS or not. I just see the CentOS name in the rpm list.
I am downloading the release now. Very very very slow download so have not been able to look at it yet.
-Connie Sieh On Thu, 26 Oct 2006, Rodrigo Barbosa wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 11:21:02AM -0500, "Ing. Ernesto Pérez Estévez" wrote:
Connie Sieh wrote:
Based on the following list it seems that Oracle's new Unbreakable Linux is really based on Centos and not rhel. Any comment on this?
Sometime back, CentOS had discussions with Goldman Sachs and Oracle concerning how we build CentOS. Nothing major, just how we do the rebuilds, etc.
Obviously, everything CentOS does is redistributable ... so we are OK with Oracle (or anyone else) using our SRPMS to build their RPMS as long as they follow the redistribution requirements.
It would be nice for them to acknowledge that they are using our SRPMS and that we are a GREAT rebuild. Donations to the CentOS project would also be accepted :)
http://oss.oracle.com/linux/legal/oracle-list.html
it is .html, small typo ;-)
as for the rest: explicit.....
The hell with oracle. The least they could do is acknowledge CentOS. But I suppose that would be expecting too much of them.
I am not holding my breath, though it would be nice.
Rodrigo Barbosa
Looks like the are behind on updates already (since seamonkey has replaced mozilla in EL4 and mozilla is in their distro).
Thanks, Johnny Hughes
The hell with oracle. The least they could do is acknowledge CentOS. But I suppose that would be expecting too much of them.
Or give a decent donation for all the work, and put up an acknowledgement. Let's wait how the field looks when all the smoke has disappeared.
-- Daniel
On Thursday 26 October 2006 09:04, Connie Sieh wrote:
Based on the following list it seems that Oracle's new Unbreakable Linux is really based on Centos and not rhel. Any comment on this?
http://oss.oracle.com/linux/legal/oracle-list.htnl
Look at the "artwork" rpm.
Hmm, Oracle is offering a support network for this product, and according to Their FAQ (http://www.oracle.com/technologies/linux/ubl-faq.pdf), they will even credit you any RHN support time you had left towards your new support contract with them if you migrate to their support system (ULN).
So, to summarize, Oracle is Redhat SRPMs (or CentOS SRPMs which is *almost* the same thing), building a distro out of them, and offering support contracts.
I assume the CentOS developers have a pretty good line on Redhat's feeling on their own project, so they may be a bit more qualified to comment on what Redhat might think about this product, which is essentially equivalent to CentOS + support. If Redhat takes to this badly, might there be fallout that affects CentOS as a whole (such as certain SRPMs no longer being published at Redhat for free use)?
Karanbir Singh:
Andrew Velikoredchanin wrote:
danieldk@pobox.com:
How I can fix it problem?
By using CentOS :).
We already have our i686 version of distro based on RHEL4. Now we try create x86_64 version and have this problem. :(
the error message is quite descriptive, trace that. its either one of your patches, or a missing package ( related to the bootloader setup ) that is missing.
This not heppen. :( I install all packets, but error out. :(
even if you dont know python, have a look and trace the variables down in that file. anaconda is nice like that - and you can even run anaconda in debug mode.
How I can debug install script?
Andrew Velikoredchanin:
Karanbir Singh:
Andrew Velikoredchanin wrote:
danieldk@pobox.com:
How I can fix it problem?
By using CentOS :).
We already have our i686 version of distro based on RHEL4. Now we try create x86_64 version and have this problem. :(
the error message is quite descriptive, trace that. its either one of your patches, or a missing package ( related to the bootloader setup ) that is missing.
This not heppen. :( I install all packets, but error out. :(
even if you dont know python, have a look and trace the variables down in that file. anaconda is nice like that - and you can even run anaconda in debug mode.
How I can debug install script?
I see one moment. When I install RHEL4, after install all rpms and ask disk1-5 it ask disk1 of distro. But my compiled variant not ask that. What need for installer when it ask disk1?
Thanks.
-
"Ing. Ernesto Pérez Estévez" -
Andrew Velikoredchanin -
Connie Sieh -
danieldk＠pobox.com -
Johnny Hughes -
Karanbir Singh -
Kevan Benson -
Rodrigo Barbosa