Feisty 7.04 Server installer hangs at 85% under vmware

Bug #124041 reported by pbergen
6
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
Ubuntu
Invalid
Undecided
Unassigned

Bug Description

Install Feisty server under vmware (all settings default for ubuntu linux).
Live in Copenhagen, Denmark, English language, US keyboard,
No swap, reiserfs /, one partition
No LAMP, No DNS

I run vmware under 64-bit ubuntu and use 32-bit feisty.
The hardware is a brand new Dell Poweredge 1900 with 4 core Xeon, sata disks and 2 GB mem.

Revision history for this message
rgazali (rgazali) wrote :

Looks not only vmware version.
I had similar problem with other i386 server version, it just stops at 85%.
The install manager has problem.

Revision history for this message
Adam Niedling (krychek) wrote :

So your host OS is 64-bit Feisty and your guest OS is 32-bit Feisty? This is not clear. Why would you do that anyway?
Did you try it with some later version of Ubuntu?

Revision history for this message
pbergen (ubuntu-9-pbergen) wrote :

Who rained on your parade Adam? There are quite a few reasons why one would choose to do so. For instance if some application was not supported under 64 bits (like flash). Or to create a test platform for a program being developed for both 32 and 64-bit platforms. Or, as in my case, to preparing the VM for later deployment as a VM under RHEL in our hosting facility.

The server is running 64-bit 7.04 on the hardware. I attempted to install ubuntu 32-bit in a VM. I have not tried it with later versions ubuntu.

Cheers,
Philip

Revision history for this message
Adam Niedling (krychek) wrote :

I had to ask my English friend what does "who rained on your parade?" mean :) I'm sorry if you felt my comment was rude.. I didn't mean to be rude. I just really couldn't imagine why would anyone want 32-bit guest under 64-bit host.

I think that this bug has nothing to do with Ubuntu, it's a problem of vmware. Maybe it would work with virtualbox. Why don't you try it?

Revision history for this message
Pedro Villavicencio (pedro) wrote :

We are closing this bug report because it lacks the information we need to investigate the problem, as described in the previous comments. Please reopen it if you can give us the missing information, and don't hesitate to submit bug reports in the future. To reopen the bug report you can click on the current status, under the Status column, and change the Status back to "New". Thanks again!.

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.