ok, stupid title

this is the issue:

• brand new hyper-v server 2016
• brand new ubuntu 16.04 server install (basic server+openssh)

I issue either "reboot" or "shutdown -r now", the system doesn't reboot it simply shutdown 9 on 10
hyper-v drivers are included in ubuntu and loaded:

user@zi-erp-as:~$ lsmod | grep hyp
hyperv_fb              20480  1
hid_hyperv             16384  0
hid                   118784  2 hid_hyperv,hid_generic
hyperv_keyboard        16384  0
hv_vmbus               90112  7 hv_balloon,hyperv_keyboard,hv_netvsc,hid_hyperv,hv_utils,hyperv_fb,hv_storvsc

reaaaallly strange... it seems an ACPI issue with the VM as now and then the reboot actually works.
no one encountered the issue yet?

EDIT:

in the while I've removed/edited a lot because I've been an idiot looking at wrong numbers and I've post other stuff which is simply wrong: previously I've cited wrong uptimes that's not right, uptimes are well recorded by VM. just reboot is an issue!

trying to install on debian stable with KVM using NAT, 1GB ram, 1CPU, 8GB disk
w/ openSUSE-Tumbleweed-NET-x86_64-Snapshot20170320-Media.iso

it is loading with the plymouth bar going on...
installer is autoupdating (C00l)... system is probed
checked additional on line repo setup date/language blabla
default partition ok
eula blablabla

HEY we are stalling!!! please, wait... no OK ready to go!

setup user and root passwords...
confirmed installation, system partitioning, packages installing. SO FAR SO GOOD HERE!

@scottalanmiller , try simplifying VM layout.

@Tim_G said in Issue installing Korora:

Lets say I have the most important website in the world to run on my server, and all I can use is Ubuntu Server. Which one do I download, and why?

The one which works for you after some serious test if this site is really critical. As a number of versions are out simultaneously, select from those which work the one with more security fixes ahead.

But realistically if this is really mission critial use centos. sof "common" server scenarios is more valuable to me. it simply sucks for repos (try scientific computation without third party softwares on centos... good luck).

@scottalanmiller said in Issue installing Korora:

@matteo-nunziati said in Issue installing Korora:

Centos has not enough packages unless you activate third party repos, debian is too fast (basically and upgrade every 2 years), Ubuntu LTS blends. I'm now curious about Opensuse Leap.

Ubuntu LTS does not blend. I think you are looking purely at "release speed" and ignoring "support". The two have to be seen together. CentOS and Leap are long term supported products. Ubuntu LTS has that in its name, but is totally different in how it is supported. The "release speed" of Ubuntu tracks Debian, but it is not fully supported / patched for that duration, so it isn't comparable to CentOS which is fully supported throughout its lifetime.

Well, support != security fixes.

I mind about the latter. not support. nor fixes in non security bugs.
OK, I agree with Linus Torvalds when he say in the end bugs are bugs, but security has some legal implications too...
Centos has support AND security fixes. both security and stability. Ubuntu has just one. Leap does strange things, actually.

@scottalanmiller said in Issue installing Korora:

@matteo-nunziati said in Issue installing Korora:

Seriously, Debian bug fix policy is really close to the one of Ubuntu (well you would rather say the opposite) and Debian is by no means a weak distro.

Debian refuses to fix bugs in their mainline product and just leaves them? By definition, that's what makes Ubuntu LTS weak, that they don't resolve critical stability issues and only push those (when they are big) to the current releases. I've never heard Debian spoken of as being like that in any way whatsoever. Totally the opposite from what I know of Debian and Ubuntu. Debian is famous for stability, not for ignoring stability issues (Ubuntu does not ignore them, but LTS does.)

follow this thread on debian mailing list (really short)

HEY! this has derailed a lot from OP!

@scottalanmiller said in Issue installing Korora:

I know of no reason to be on LTS other than "I have packages from a lazy vendor and that's more important that OS stability to me."

That's it! you got me!

Seriously, Debian bug fix policy is really close to the one of Ubuntu (well you would rather say the opposite) and Debian is by no means a weak distro. My usage of ubuntu is as basic platform for java/python webapps. The ubuntu install I do is always in VM and always a minimal system install. The only addiction is open-ssh. bugs are there for sure. But I use the bare minimum OS, and it has worked quite well for now:

• setup an IP,
• have bash,
• schedule cron jobs,
• setup a systemd unit file.
• not having to deal with new API/ABI/interpreters
• p.e.r.i.o.d.

but my concern is mostly security fixes and a low flux of updates. Not because I'm really obsessed by security, but because well... you have to security fix stuff now and then

compare the pkg flow to debian stable or centos, it is quite similar in LTS, while standard Ubuntu litterally kills you with a ton of updates.

Let state this different: I do NOT trust Ubuntu for critical pieces but is just practical as a base to deploy your specific app in a VM. For this usage having security fixes for 5 years is enough to me, even if some pieces have bugs and are not fixed. I do not use it for any kind of virtualization, DNS, AD or similar.

Centos has not enough packages unless you activate third party repos, debian is too fast (basically and upgrade every 2 years), Ubuntu LTS blends. I'm now curious about Opensuse Leap.

BTW, I think we two are thinking about stability in a different way. You think, correctly, at it as system stability: avoid bugs that cause chrashes and races and so in the OS behaviour, having the best level of functionality a piece of software can give.

I think about stability as a coder: avoid ABI/API changes, interpreter major version bumps and so. just get security fixes and forget the platform for 5 years.
I use Ubuntu mostly as a platform to deploy my applications. So I think I'm interested in LTS mostly because it tends to not break API/API/interpreters (thinking about moving from python 2.7 to 3.5 or even 3.5 to 3.6 - on a minor note).

@scottalanmiller said in Issue installing Korora:

@matteo-nunziati said in Issue installing Korora:

ubuntu LTS,

For robust you actually want to avoid the LTS release. It's a name, not a long term support agreement. This is straight from Canonica, it you want the robust Ubuntu option, you must stay on the current release, not the LTS.

https://mangolassi.it/topic/8737/how-ubuntu-lts-support-works

well, wrong word. I mean that I receive fewer security only updates - basically it is more close to debian stable in terms of security patches. I prefere to know my bugs than update every week a ton of packages. I really hate how ubuntu flows with tens of updates every week. I even consider to stay 1 version behind current LTS, even if, in the end I always land on the current LTS for other reasons.

@Tim_G said in Issue installing Korora:

Actually, you know what...

I'll just stick to the main trunks of Linux flavors from now on, personally and professionally: Debian/Ubuntu, Slackware/SuSE, RedHat/CentOS/Fedora, and Arch.... oh and I'll include FreeBSD (only for the sake of completion), but I don't consider that Linux at all (it's not).

I believe I finally arrived at the point where I just don't think there is any reason to consider anything else for any purpose... be it enterprise or personal.

The rest of them I think is just the IKEA effect at it's finest...

for business centos, ubuntu LTS, SLE, debian and -maybe now- opensuse are the most robust choices IMHO.

I usually stick with centos on bare metal (KVM) or critical services, while I opt for ubuntu in VM (mostly because it is a faster debian install). Still missing the opportunity to test Suse in real envs.

On the desktop any of the above will fit, but centos/SLE is a bit of old for a control machine/workstation.

I keep Fedora out because it seems rather bleeding edge to me.

Of course in the years I've meet (on line) people who deploy arch linux and slackware in production, but this is not quite common.

UPDATE
After the miserable MOBO failure, I've reinstalled the system again, but, this time, the "install windows as usual" didn't work anymore. This is a symptom that somwthin was "strange" with first run. Anyway there is an hardcore a-la-slackware-linux solution for installation. I've updated the how-to accordingly.

premise

ok, yes, it's a microSD I know...
anyway this is the how-to for anyone in need.
I've wasted something like 2 days to figure out how to do this, despite being this a supported and certified solution. HP support has been partially useful. Infact Intelligent Provisioning (automatic provisioning for a given OS) is broken.

preparation

• remove all of your disks, if you have disks into the arrays you will not be able to install on the microsd <- yay! this is 2017 and still we play these games
• enter bios settings and be sure that USB3 is disable (you can reenable later) and VID is enabled
• make a handy hyper-v bootable usb or you will be out of luck

VID is the "virtual installation disk" and contains all the drivers required for the dl380.

installation

• enter the bios one-time boot menu end select to boot from the USB pen
• when the windows setup appears, choose the little link on the lower-left corner: "repair pc", then enter toolboxes and run a DOS command shell
• use diskpart to setup partitions on the microSD: verify which disk is your microSD, I consider it here as disk 0

diskpart
list disk 
select disk 0
clean <- this erases the disk!!!
convert gpt
create partition efi size=100
format quick fs=fat32 label="System"
assign letter="S"
create partition msr size=16
create partition primary 
format quick fs=ntfs label="Windows"
assign letter="W"
exit

• from command line:

powercfg /s 8c5e7fda-e8bf-4a96-9a85-a6e23a8c635c
dism /Apply-Image /ImageFile:D:\install.wim /Index:1 /ApplyDir:W:\ <- MIND that D: is your USB pen letter, adjust accordingly

• wait for the extraction of the entire OS on the microSD, then

bcdboot W:\Windows /s S:

• reboot, automatic, several times, just remove the USB and let the server start the normal way.

windows will boot and ask for an admin password. mind that this installation is not localized: just use letters and numbers you are able to recognize once you will adjust your localization.

final thoughts
It is damned simple straightforward, when you have discovered:

• the right combination of bios settings which correctly allows you to install
• you have understood that Intelligent Provisioning, the HP tool for setting up bios for you, is broken, will create an unbootable NTFS efi partition and will broken your USB media.

hope this will save time to someone else!

bye,
M

PS: used guides: partitioning, installation

+1 on everything @JaredBusch . Not needed now but valuable for future!
@Dashrender ans @scottalanmiller currently we use one of these

Just made the first seasonal clean up of my garden... And you don't even notice the difference
Than it should be a home made pizza saturday dinner.
Going to post some shots...here

debian with xfce at home, physical host. ubuntu mate at work, in a VM: I've to stick with win10. everything like xfce/mate is ok to me.

I also own a laptop with debian + gnome 3 but nowdays I do not use it anymore. <- it is now used by my wife.

@Tim_G said in Issue installing Korora:

Also, maybe it has something to do with this mmc0 error. I don't see why as I think that's card reader or something.

yes card reader. IMHO you should be fine ignoring it.

The live boot works great, everything works. No idea why I can't install...

well the live do not manage to install on the disk... when you say you see it from gpartede you mean from the gparted instance into the live env? if so the env has controller drivers for your ssd.

did you try - as test- to partition the ssd from gparted run into the live env? at least you can be sure you can partition the ssd.

if you have stuff on the ssd try also -and first- to mount it in the live env and open random files here and there.

for text install try passing the kernel option inst.text. advice: never tried it!

@scottalanmiller yes but if you look at what has been updated recently in leap, they have diverged from SLES kernel It is not clear what it is really in leap from SLES and what from community.

therefore hardware certifications are not there. it is a trial and error thing. For everything else it seems nice, they also have a great primer for virtualization on leap with xen

Btw... What about opensuse? Now they should move to a 4 year support window(*)... Do they still distribute xen hypervisor components or did they dropped it like redhat?

(*) still I do not know if they change kernel and other base stuff more frequently...

I think they had done it on galaxy

reason for this, to me, is partially induced by the amount of work/materials required in a company to get the job done.

When you start it is really close to what you do in your house, so you go to the mall and buy a router, a laptop and so... you do not think about planning, it is just another piece of HW you need, like the smartphone. You do not hire a consultant to buy a smartphone.

a SMB with no more then 10 people will need not so much, maybe just an intervention now or then, let say to change a burned router every 3/5 years, or a broken disk in a NAS. This stuff is so rare that the SMB do not hire competent people to manage it - they just buy stuff like in their own house-, therefore, the SMB has a relevant degree of ignorance on a topic.

the commercial guy in front of the SMB is (apparently) a huge source of information for the SMB, they do not need to go deeper on tech details: they can't even totally understand what the commercial is exposing.

Now you will say: hay, consultants are there for this very topic: let SMB not be fooled/deviated by bad commercial practices.

Yes, but this implies that the SMB has - at least - a bare minimum degree of knowledge about its own ignorance.

Unfortunately they have not. Everything starts with something small, let say a small 2-disk NAS. Hey it worked! now what, oh we need a small server. Hey the commercial guy has solved the problem last time, let's call him again, he will solve it!

Then you start buy stuff and stuff, in the end IT is not the core business it is just like other tools you need to make the job done. period. what matterst is if you have margins.

Here is where you start thinking about consultats. when margins are hard. and the bigger you are the harder to keep margins high. therefore you start minding about what you are doing. And consultants start here. But it is not the IT consultant. the IT consultant is at the end of the queue, first you start with company organization, with people and procedures, THEN you ask for consultancy on tools.

@BRRABill I think this link clarifies it

@BRRABill also here