[PC-BSD Testing] 9.1-BETA1 now available!
A-Koziol at neiu.edu
Thu Jul 19 09:52:45 PDT 2012
On 07/19/2012 11:41 AM, Kris Moore wrote:
> On 07/19/2012 12:18, Arthur wrote:
>> On 07/19/2012 9:24 AM, Kris Moore wrote:
>>> On 07/19/2012 10:12, Arthur wrote:
>>>> I'm currently trying to install the new beta on x86 but it seems to
>>>> be stuck on KDE installation. Currently, it's stuck on "Installing
>>>> Meta-Package: KDE" (18%) and "Installing package:
>>>> kde-workspace-4.8.4" (12%). It's been stuck on this percentage for
>>>> about 30 minutes now. HD light is solid but there is no DVD
>>>> activity. Machine is not locked up or anything.
>>> Right-click to open an xterm, and run "top" is anything using up CPU?
>> It's showing pkg_add as the highest CPU using process but at around
>> 1%+/-. That's nothing. However, I think I have found the problem. I'm
>> using my usual abuse box (Dell Optiplex 960, 4GB RAM, Core 2 Duo
>> 3.3GHz) and I am noticing that when I choose to install by just using
>> the "Next" buttons, it defaults to ZFS when partitioning the drive.
>> So I restarted the install and did and Advanced install when it came
>> to the HD and chose SU+J. When I used this option, installation
>> completed in around 11 minutes and it did not hang at the previous
>> place. So in this case, I am pointing the finger squarely at ZFS.
>> I don't know how strongly committed you guys are committed to the
>> model of if RAM => 4GB use ZFS else if RAM < 4GB use SU+J, but it's
>> just my humblest of opinions to suggest defaulting to UFS instead of
>> ZFS even if a system has 4GB or more. Otherwise, maybe give some kind
>> of option to choose one or the other during that portion of the
>> install and explain the difference. To me, ZFS should be left to the
>> realm of the uber power users or those who'd want to dig around in
>> the Advanced menu options and choose it specifically. It could be
>> that this is just a one-off event that happened to me but some other
>> user installing 9.1 might encounter this and say "WTF?" and think
>> it's hung up on something and scrap the install not knowing ZFS was
>> to blame. Just sayin'.
>> Other than that, install went fine with SU+J, detected monitor and
>> on-board Intel VGA just fine. Looks great so far!
> I'd be curious how long it took to finish with ZFS in your case, of it
> it just hung. I do all my installs here with ZFS, and it only takes
> 10-15 minutes usually.
Me too. Any way to add some kind of timer stating it took "xx:xx"
minutes to complete the install? I can run the installer with ZFS and
let it go overnight to see if it finishes.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Testing