FC4 Boot Problem: invalid compressed image

menator · #1 14th June 2005, 04:34 AM

After installing fedora core 4 I get this when trying to boot.

invalid compressed image err=2

system halted...

Any ideas?

k4dgw · #2 14th June 2005, 04:50 AM

If memory serves me correctly the kernal is stored compressed. Sounds like you may have a corrupted kernal. If it was myself, I would make sure I still had good backups and try re-installing. Did you do a md5 on the ISO's before burning? Did you do the media check on each of the disks before the installation? Just some ideas. Maybe someone else will have something better. Good luck.

menator · #3 14th June 2005, 04:56 AM

Just tried booting again, but now I get "ran out of input data." Not quite sure what that means. k4dgw: That is what i was thinking. I'm going to try installing again. I did burn the dvd at 4x though. The md5's checked out too. Strange...

k4dgw · #4 14th June 2005, 05:01 AM

Ok, good. I did my recent burns (not FC4, torrent still downloading) at DAO and 8x and that had been working fine for me. Make sure and do the media checks at the begining of the install too. I used to skip those until I got burned. Good luck.

menator · #5 15th June 2005, 03:38 AM

Okay, burned the four iso's/then installed and I now get "invalid compressed image err=1"

Could this be related to a boot option?

Sepht · #6 15th June 2005, 04:19 AM

Input data error also...
1.8ghz P4

I ran reiserfs + no LVM + no selinux

menator · #7 15th June 2005, 04:44 AM

Okay, tried playing with different boot options. No go. The error is actually "invalid compressed format err=1" instead of what I have above. I'm going to check the mailing lists to see if I can find anything.

Sepht · #8 15th June 2005, 05:34 AM

Sorry about my previous post, what I meant was I was getting the "ran out of input data" on boot.
when I installed I did it under reiserfs, LVM, and selinux... I'll try it tommorow or Thursday with ext, no se and no lvm. then ext3, lvm, and no se. and then I'll give up.

jumbon · #9 15th June 2005, 09:10 AM

I have the same problem as you, but I reinstall the system with ext3 format, it is ok, I don't understand why I cannot install it on reiserfs system, queer! maybe something wrong with swap partition, when I use disk dirud make reiserfs partition, the swap partition seems not work properly, after booted failed, I use rescue disk to grub, the partition information is swp partition is unkown format, 0x82, others is ok. I guess it is something with swp partition. I will reinstall the reiserfs this evening to see the problem.

Sepht · #10 15th June 2005, 03:17 PM

0x82 is the type for a linux swap partition.
First time I installed I had a problem on /dev/hda3(my swap partition) right before it started to copy files from Disk1.

Shucks that reiserfs isn't technically supported. At least I don't think it is.
http://www.fedorafaq.org/#reiserjfs

xbaxe · #11 15th June 2005, 03:27 PM

Whats so good about reiserfs?

yanik · #12 15th June 2005, 04:06 PM

it's a lot faster than ext3, I've been using reiserfs on my debian box for 2 years now, and it shows when doing things like importing 20GB of mp3 in rhtyhmbox and such. Just google ext3 vs reiserfs...You'll see the benchmarks

Note: you'll see people saying reiserfs is not as stable as ext3, but we don't run data center here! reiserfs is just great.

Sepht · #13 15th June 2005, 08:59 PM

Not only the speed or performance.
i.e. MySQL
reiserfs
real 12m39.095s
ext3
real 14m58.782s

But also the metafiles
http://navindra.blogspot.com/2004/10...e-failure.html

http://linuxgazette.net/102/piszcz.html
http://www.namesys.com/benchmarks.html
http://vizzzion.org/?id=reiser4

yanik · #14 15th June 2005, 09:45 PM

ok I tried XFS and it's working, great. But I would still prefer reiserfs.

Sepht · #15 16th June 2005, 12:45 AM

I'll go with ext3.. XFS is slightly too fragile for me.

If the system ever locks up, there's a solid chance I can lose data, nothing I'd ever want to run the risk of doing.

It's a desktop system anyways, I can live with ext3.