Subject: Re: Install Disk2 Can't Be Read
To: Geoff Burling <llywrch@agora.rdrop.com>
From: Ronald Cotoni <setient@vlaxus.cjb.net>
List: port-sparc
Date: 08/03/2002 20:19:25
yeah it can dd the images but the disk can still be messed up i had it
happen once or twice must be bad floppy disks try using the first floppy
disk for both images like after the first one loads dd the second one to
the first floppy disk.

On Sat, 3 Aug 2002, Geoff Burling wrote:

> On Sat, 3 Aug 2002, Ronald Cotoni wrote:
>
> > floppy might be bad it happens alot on sparcs for some reason
> >
> > On Sat, 3 Aug 2002, Geoff Burling wrote:
> >
> > > I'm having a problem installing NetBSD 1.5.2 on a SparcStation10 that
> > > I can't work around. It is running PROM version 2.9, & when I boot I
> > > see a MAC address, & I believe the processor is the SM20 (the jumpers
> > > are set for a 33Mhz speed).
> > >
> > > I've downloaded the iso image for this release from the NetBSD ftp site,
> > > burned the iso file to a cdrom with cdrecord, verified that the cdrom
> > > is readable, then using a i86 Linux box dd'd the disk1 & disk2 images
> > > onto some floppies, & tried to start the floppy install process.
> > >
> > > Disk1 boots successfully. The SparcStation ejects that floppy, &
> > > the install script prompts me for the second floppy. I specify
> > > the default setting for the floppy drive -- /dev/rfd0a. When I insert
> > > it, it appears that it doesn't know how to read disk2, asks for
> > > another tar archive, & with a flurry of error messages stops, forcing
> > > me to go into the OpenProm to abort the install. The floppy ends
> > > up locked in the floppy drive, & I am forced to insert a paper clip
> > > to eject the floppy disk.
> > >
> I forgot to explain that I troubleshot this part.
>
> This has happened with two different disks. Both were tested beforehand
> by running ``dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/fd0" on the Linux box, & making sure
> that 2880 blocks were written.
>
> One floppy I did this twice, including running mke2fs on the floppy,
> then reimaging. Is there a better test I should try?
>
> Geoff
>
>
>
>