NetBSD Problem Report #16131

Received: (qmail 16585 invoked from network); 30 Mar 2002 17:45:08 -0000
Message-Id: <20020330174500.B278F7B4B@berkshire.research.att.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2002 12:45:00 -0500 (EST)
From: smb@research.att.com
Reply-To: smb@research.att.com
To: gnats-bugs@gnats.netbsd.org
Subject: inadequate installation document
X-Send-Pr-Version: 3.95

>Number:         16131
>Category:       install
>Synopsis:       INSTALL.html doesn't give a path name for one-fs local install
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       serious
>Priority:       medium
>Responsible:    install-manager
>State:          open
>Class:          doc-bug
>Submitter-Id:   net
>Arrival-Date:   Sat Mar 30 17:46:01 +0000 2002
>Closed-Date:    
>Last-Modified:  Thu Jun 21 05:48:54 +0000 2012
>Originator:     Steven M. Bellovin
>Release:        NetBSD 1.5.3_RC1
>Organization:
AT&T Labs Research
>Environment:

System: NetBSD berkshire.research.att.com 1.5.3_ALPHA NetBSD 1.5.3_ALPHA (BERKSHIRE.nosound) #5: Wed Feb 20 22:37:19 EST 2002 root@:/usr/src/sys/arch/i386/compile/BERKSHIRE.nosound i386


>Description:
	A number of times, I've tried to download the full collection
	of binary sets to /usr/home/smb/foo.  I've never yet managed to
	figure out how to tell sysinst where they're located, since I
	haven't figured out where it's going to mount /usr, and when.
	This should be documented -- the case of a two-partition system,
	/ and /usr, is hardly unusual, / doesn't generally have the room,
	and /usr is going to be mounted someplace non-obvious.
>How-To-Repeat:
	Run sysinst...
>Fix:

>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:

From: Havard Eidnes <he@netbsd.org>
To: smb@research.att.com
Cc: gnats-bugs@gnats.netbsd.org
Subject: Re: install/16131: inadequate installation document
Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 23:29:01 +0200 (CEST)

 > 	A number of times, I've tried to download the full collection
 > 	of binary sets to /usr/home/smb/foo.  I've never yet managed to
 > 	figure out how to tell sysinst where they're located, since I
 > 	haven't figured out where it's going to mount /usr, and when.
 > 	This should be documented -- the case of a two-partition system,
 > 	/ and /usr, is hardly unusual, / doesn't generally have the room,
 > 	and /usr is going to be mounted someplace non-obvious.

 I'll admit that I've not tried this myself, but the way I read the
 source there are two ways to refer to a local directory: either a
 currently unmounted file system, or a directory on an already mounted
 file system.  Which of these are you referring to?

 In the latter case, it's assumed that you have manually mounted the
 file system already, if I've understood correctly, whereas in the
 former case you supply device, fs type and relative directory to the
 mount point yourself, and get it mounted read-only under /mnt2.

 So, why do you need to know where sysinst is going to mount the file
 system -- doesn't it remember /mnt2/<fs-local-dir>/ as the distrib set
 directory?

 Regards,

 - H=E5vard

From: "Steven M. Bellovin" <smb@research.att.com>
To: Havard Eidnes <he@netbsd.org>
Cc: gnats-bugs@gnats.netbsd.org
Subject: Re: install/16131: inadequate installation document 
Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 18:45:23 -0400

 In message <20020606.232901.112798398.he@uninett.no>, Havard Eidnes write=
 s:
 >> 	A number of times, I've tried to download the full collection
 >> 	of binary sets to /usr/home/smb/foo.  I've never yet managed to
 >> 	figure out how to tell sysinst where they're located, since I
 >> 	haven't figured out where it's going to mount /usr, and when.
 >> 	This should be documented -- the case of a two-partition system,
 >> 	/ and /usr, is hardly unusual, / doesn't generally have the room,
 >> 	and /usr is going to be mounted someplace non-obvious.
 >
 >I'll admit that I've not tried this myself, but the way I read the
 >source there are two ways to refer to a local directory: either a
 >currently unmounted file system, or a directory on an already mounted
 >file system.  Which of these are you referring to?
 >
 >In the latter case, it's assumed that you have manually mounted the
 >file system already, if I've understood correctly, whereas in the
 >former case you supply device, fs type and relative directory to the
 >mount point yourself, and get it mounted read-only under /mnt2.
 >
 >So, why do you need to know where sysinst is going to mount the file
 >system -- doesn't it remember /mnt2/<fs-local-dir>/ as the distrib set
 >directory?
 >
 My problem is that the documentation doesn't mention /mnt2.

 I have the common case:  / and /usr as the two file systems on the =

 disk.  (Indeed, if I recall correctly that's the default installation.) =

 That means that if I'm going to download things first, I'm going to put =

 them somewhere in /usr.  The installation document should explain that =

 if you have the sets in /usr/home/foo/install-sets, you should tell =

 sysinst /mnt2/usr/home/foo/install-sets, or whatever it is.  (I *think* =

 I tried that string the last time I did a sysinst, and I don't think it =

 worked, which is why I followed up on the PR -- for obvious reasons, =

 I'm about to do some sysinsts.)

 		--Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb (me)
 		http://www.wilyhacker.com ("Firewalls" book)



From: Havard Eidnes <he@uninett.no>
To: smb@research.att.com
Cc: gnats-bugs@gnats.netbsd.org
Subject: Re: install/16131: inadequate installation document 
Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2002 00:53:37 +0200 (CEST)

 > My problem is that the documentation doesn't mention /mnt2.

 It should not have to.

 > I have the common case:  / and /usr as the two file systems on the =

 > disk.  (Indeed, if I recall correctly that's the default installation=
 .) =

 > That means that if I'm going to download things first, I'm going to p=
 ut =

 > them somewhere in /usr.  The installation document should explain tha=
 t =

 > if you have the sets in /usr/home/foo/install-sets, you should tell =

 > sysinst /mnt2/usr/home/foo/install-sets, or whatever it is.  (I *thin=
 k* =

 > I tried that string the last time I did a sysinst, and I don't think =
 it =

 > worked, which is why I followed up on the PR -- for obvious reasons, =

 > I'm about to do some sysinsts.)

 If the file system is not mounted at the time, you should supply it
 with "wd0g" (or whatever), "ffs" and "home/foo/install-sets", i.e.
 provide a pathname relative to the root of the file system.  The fact
 that the file system is normally mounted as /usr should not matter.

 At least that's what I understood from reading the code.

 - H=E5vard

From: "Steven M. Bellovin" <smb@research.att.com>
To: Havard Eidnes <he@uninett.no>
Cc: gnats-bugs@gnats.netbsd.org
Subject: Re: install/16131: inadequate installation document 
Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 18:59:17 -0400

 In message <20020607.005337.72097425.he@uninett.no>, Havard Eidnes writes=
 :
 >> My problem is that the documentation doesn't mention /mnt2.
 >
 >It should not have to.
 >
 >> I have the common case:  / and /usr as the two file systems on the =

 >> disk.  (Indeed, if I recall correctly that's the default installation.=
 ) =

 >> That means that if I'm going to download things first, I'm going to pu=
 t =

 >> them somewhere in /usr.  The installation document should explain that=
  =

 >> if you have the sets in /usr/home/foo/install-sets, you should tell =

 >> sysinst /mnt2/usr/home/foo/install-sets, or whatever it is.  (I *think=
 * =

 >> I tried that string the last time I did a sysinst, and I don't think i=
 t =

 >> worked, which is why I followed up on the PR -- for obvious reasons, =

 >> I'm about to do some sysinsts.)
 >
 >If the file system is not mounted at the time, you should supply it
 >with "wd0g" (or whatever), "ffs" and "home/foo/install-sets", i.e.
 >provide a pathname relative to the root of the file system.  The fact
 >that the file system is normally mounted as /usr should not matter.
 >
 >At least that's what I understood from reading the code.
 >

 I'll try it, but I don't think that works, either, since the same file =

 system can't be mounted twice and sysinst is going to need to mount it =

 to do installations there.  (I just verified that on -current -- I got =

 "Device busy" on the second mount.)

 		--Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb (me)
 		http://www.wilyhacker.com ("Firewalls" book)



From: Havard Eidnes <he@netbsd.org>
To: smb@research.att.com
Cc: gnats-bugs@gnats.netbsd.org
Subject: Re: install/16131: inadequate installation document 
Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2002 01:43:42 +0200 (CEST)

 > I'll try it, but I don't think that works, either, since the same fil=
 e =

 > system can't be mounted twice and sysinst is going to need to mount i=
 t =

 > to do installations there.  (I just verified that on -current -- I go=
 t =

 > "Device busy" on the second mount.)

 Hm, possibly.  Note that the file system will be mounted read-only by
 sysinst; I don't know whether that'll make any difference.  Trying to
 mount an already-mounted-for-rw file system read-only failed, anyway.

 - H=E5vard

From: "Steven M. Bellovin" <smb@research.att.com>
To: Havard Eidnes <he@netbsd.org>
Cc: gnats-bugs@gnats.netbsd.org
Subject: Re: install/16131: inadequate installation document 
Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 20:04:15 -0400

 In message <20020607.014342.106432366.he@uninett.no>, Havard Eidnes write=
 s:
 >> I'll try it, but I don't think that works, either, since the same file=
  =

 >> system can't be mounted twice and sysinst is going to need to mount it=
  =

 >> to do installations there.  (I just verified that on -current -- I got=
  =

 >> "Device busy" on the second mount.)
 >
 >Hm, possibly.  Note that the file system will be mounted read-only by
 >sysinst; I don't know whether that'll make any difference.  Trying to
 >mount an already-mounted-for-rw file system read-only failed, anyway.
 >

 It doesn't help; that was what I tried, and I don't think the -t msdos
 is the difference:

 # mount -r -t msdos /dev/wd0f /dos
 # mount -r -t msdos /dev/wd0f /mnt
 mount_msdos: /dev/wd0f on /mnt: Device busy



 		--Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb (me)
 		http://www.wilyhacker.com ("Firewalls" book)


State-Changed-From-To: open->feedback
State-Changed-By: riz@NetBSD.org
State-Changed-When: Tue, 08 Jun 2010 03:49:49 +0000
State-Changed-Why:
sysinst has changed a lot since 1.5.3;  does this problem still occur?


State-Changed-From-To: feedback->open
State-Changed-By: dholland@NetBSD.org
State-Changed-When: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 05:48:54 +0000
State-Changed-Why:
submitter's mail is bouncing.


>Unformatted:

Home	PR Database Search