[SOLVED] Zentyal 64bit setup: manual partitioning broken?

[bbking]

Hi there,

can anyone confirm / deny that the manual partitioning on the newest zetyal 64bit iso does not work? I always get a red warning "could not find root partition" and have a deadlock (when I push the "continue" button, I again get the red warning and have to quit installation)

Please, this would be urgent as I am at the beginning of a fresh install.

Thanks a lot in advance!

[robb]

Did you check MD5 to make sure your ISO is ok?

Maybe to be absolutely sure, download the ISO again...
btw, I did not use the manual partition option myself so can't confirm.

[bbking]

yes, the iso is OK, I checked that. I am installing from a USB-Stick, though.

I had the same problem with 2.0.2-amd64, so that's why I'm not sure, what's wrong....

thanks anyway!

[vshaulsk]

I use manual partitioning on one server and manual partitioning with software raid on another server.

I have it partitioned into /root  /var  /home  /swap  /boot   on one machine and just /root /home /swap on another

I install through a CD.... have never tried through USB.

[bbking]

thanks for the info. Are you using the 64bit version?

[vshaulsk]

Yes I have the 64 bit version, but I don't really have any idea why its not working for you.  All I can say is it does work.
(actually as I write this..... I think I had an issue in the beginning when I was trying to create my 2.0 server)  I think the issue is the reason I installed a cd drive in the server.   I just don't remember exactly what it was.

Also I am not sure if this will help anyone solve your issue, but could you take a picture of the your partion screen.  The one that shows your disks, how you partioned them and how they are labeled.

[Escorpiom]

Recently I had to reinstall my server, Zentyal 2.2 64 bit from CD and I can confirm manual partitioning works.
Can't comment on USB install, haven't tried it yet.

Cheers.

[bbking]

Managed to get a cd drive on the server and boot from the CD. Now the manual partitioning works. This is quite weird behaviour for the same image, huh??