On Mon, 2004-06-07 at 11:21, Ashley M. Kirchner wrote: > Dan Thurman wrote: > > >I apologize if I hve not read the original thread, but did > >you upgrade or fresh install FC2? I am thinking of the 'divide > >and conquer' process. If you did an upgrade, then perhaps the > >problem is caused by the "left over" files? If you have the time > >or opportunity, try a FRESH install of FC2 and see if the problem > >goes away. If you did a 'fresh' install, then never mind. > > > >I had some problems with the UPGRADES where somethings "left behind" > >caused all sorts of strange behaviors but I was focusing on the > >GNOME/KDE system components. I have yet to find out the other > >potential upgrade problems as I have not had the time to investigate > >it but will do so soon. > > > This was a fresh install. I've never done OS upgrades. It's always > been a full reformat and reinstall of everything. From what was > happening with the server, my first guess would be something with the > IDE driver. More specifically, something that had to do with a large > (200GB) drive because very time the kernel panicked, it had something to > do with the ext3 fs on only that drive. If I didn't mount that drive, > the system would run without any problems. As soon as it gets mounted, > things start to go wrong. It can last 5 minutes or 5 hours, but it will > eventually just panic and lock up. > > Now that I have FC1 on the system, everything's working just fine. > The 200GB drive is mounted and operational. All its data is nfs > exported to the rest of the network and everyone can mount and umount at > their hearts content. This I couldn't do with FC2. It simply wouldn't > stay up long enough to even try to export its fs to the rest of the network. > > Because this is a production machine, and those exports are needed > every night during backup routines, I had no recourse but to downgrade > to get back to a stable platform. No time to dig deeper into the > problem and possibly find a cause or cure. I did however post the > OOPSes that I got, at least two of them. I got no response from the list. ----- I guess it's just me but I tend to stick to proven distro's for production servers. I wouldn't necessarily put FC-1 in that category and obviously, not FC-2. Obviously Red Hat considers their RHEL to be the 'stable' product and Fedora to be the experimental/development product. The philosophy has changed since RHL. That being said, I guess in the final analysis, what you have done here is commit the proverbial spin yours and everyone else's wheels. Consider please: - it ain't a bug if it isn't in bugzilla. - if you have a problem, the moment you 'rollback', your problem report is relegated to the equivalent of noise to the list since no suggested fixes can be experimented. I am amazed at the number of people that don't recognize the experimental nature of the Fedora distribution and are content to be part of the problem rather than part of the solution. Craig
