The following reply was made to PR install/37156; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: "Randolf Richardson" <randy@inter-corporate.com>
To: Pavel Cahyna <pavel@NetBSD.org>, gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
Cc: randolf+netbsd.org@inter-corporate.com
Subject: Re: install/37156: RC3 breaks something that worked in Beta2
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 17:28:27 -0700

 > The following reply was made to PR install/37156; it has been noted by GNATS.
 > 
 > From: Pavel Cahyna <pavel@NetBSD.org>
 > To: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
 > Cc: install-manager@NetBSD.org, gnats-admin@NetBSD.org,
 > 	netbsd-bugs@NetBSD.org
 > Subject: Re: install/37156: RC3 breaks something that worked in Beta2
 > Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2007 10:34:13 +0200
 > 
 >  > When I install NetBSD 4 Beta2 (200708030002z) from the i386 ISO (burned
 >  > on a CD), it works fine.  Using the NetBSD 4 RC3 i386 ISO results in the
 >  > system not being bootable.
 >  
 >  How exactly does booting fail?
 
 	Thank you so much for your prompt reply.  I just re-installed using 
 RC3 in the hopes of seeing the error again, but this time it didn't 
 fail; now I suspect the problem was that I used existing partition 
 sizes the first time around, yet this time I actually went in and set 
 them (I kept them the same actually; the only change was from FFSv1 
 to FFSv2).
 
 >  > During the installation process, I noticed that the final step when
 >  > files are being copied (and the progress bar appears), with RC3 it slips
 >  > by so quickly that it seems like it was missed; with Beta2 a few moments
 >  > are needed to copy files to the hard drive.
 >  
 >  So were the files copied to the hard drive or not? You could check for
 >  example by running the installer again and mounting the filesystems
 >  manually.
 
 	I suspect that the files were not copied the first time because the 
 stage with the "progress bar" skipped by so quickly (less than one or 
 two seconds instead of the usual 1 to 2 minutes).
 
 >  Was it a fresh install or an upgrade?
 
 	It was a fresh installation.  This is my preference with all 
 Operating Systems because upgrades sometimes bring along baggage 
 which can cause strange problems, and compared to the time required 
 to troubleshoot these problems it's generally easier and faster to 
 just resort to backups for data after installing the needed packages.
 
 	I now suspect that the problem may be that the installation process 
 is not erasing the partition for a "new installation" if current 
 partition sizes are accepted as-is, and I believe that this is what 
 threw me off.
 
 	The system seems to be working now, and appears to be compatible 
 with my hardware.  I'm sorry if I've wasted your time, and I really 
 do appreciate your quick response to my report.
 
 	You should consider this issue closed as far as SASCSI controller 
 compatibility is concerned, but you may be interested in checking 
 into the installation user interface with regards to what happens in 
 a new installation if existing partition sizes are selected (the 
 expectation from my perspective, which of course could very well be 
 incorrect, is that the data will still be effectively deleted since a 
 "new installation" was selected instead of "upgrade" or "re-install 
 sets" which obviously shouldn't do this).
 
 	Thank you for your time and your help.
 
 Randolf Richardson - randolf@richardson.tw
 Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
 http://www.randolf.richardson.tw/
 
 "Radio-active cats have 18 half-lives."