On Thu, 5 Apr 2001, Kazushi (Jam) Marukawa wrote:

>    On Apr 5, 17:50, David Brownlee wrote:
>    > Subject: Re: 1.5 installation into Cyrix from scratch
>    > On Thu, 5 Apr 2001, Kazushi (Jam) Marukawa wrote:
>    > >  - Installation of 1.5 failed because of uvm_pagefault.  I
>    > >    guess this is caused by the Cyrix pmap_zero problem.
>    >
>    > 	Does it panic when loading the install kernel from floppy?
>    > 	If so, are you able to test a 1.5.1_ALPHA install floppy
>    > 	(do not need to install, just confirm problem is fixed).
>
> No.  It paniced while it is executing pax for base or comp.
> On the other hand, another report at 13 Jan, 2001 on
> port-i386 ML, said it paniced while creating devices.
>
	Bugger... that is going to be an awkward one to test.
	If someone with a 'problem' cyrix could test the recent
	1.5.1_ALPHA snapshot that would be a very useful datapoint
	(unfortunately they'll need to try a full install)

> Sorry, no.  This happened when I did following things.  The
> installer did newfs, fsck, and mount wd0a, then it started
> newfs wd0e.  If I pushed ^C, it crashed.  Or, the end of
> installation, it crashed while trying to reboot.  Or, I
> typed "mount wd0a /mnt", and found I need fsck, then I typed
> "umount /mnt", it crashed.  So, I though it crashes when it
> try to unmount modified file system.
>
	Did the kernel panic with a similar message to the one in
	the pax or MAKEDEV panic above?

>    > >  - After installation, my machine didn't boot.  It showed
>    > >    "Invalid partition table" error.  I need to do "fdisk -B"
>    > >    by hand.  This hard drive was a boot drive of Win98, so I
>    > >    thought it already have Win98's MBR.  Maybe Win98's MBR
>    > >    is not compatible...  Is it possible to install MBR
>    > >    automatically with confirmation as a part of installation
>    > >    job?
>    >
>    > 	We _really_ ought to ask if we should unconditionally overwrite
>    > 	the MBR - did the 1.5R snapshot not include a question like this?
>
> It asked me to write boot something at the very beginning of
> installation.  I thought it was MBR question, but MBR was
> not installed.  So, I think this question was about
> installboot.  I remember I didn't get any questions about
> MBR.  Did it ask me after unmounting all file systems?  If
> so, I understand I couldn't see it because of above unmount
> problem.
>
	Frank mentioned in another mail that the MBR if there are
	multiple MBR partitions and you answer no to both bootloader
	and bootcode questions - did you get two questions?

> Anyway, the installer of 1.5 is much better than old one.  I
> like it.  Thank you for improvements.

	I'm sure those that have put in the hard work to improve it
	are glad its appreciated :)

		David/absolute		-- www.netbsd.org: No hype required --