040ee119 error on boot
-
I just tried the f473 undionly.kpxe and got the attached error.
I too was having the 0x040ee119
[url=“/_imported_xf_attachments/0/856_ScreenShot519.png?:”]ScreenShot519.png[/url]
-
Both undionly.kkpxe and undionly.kpxe work 100% of the time for my Dell 3010s with realtek controllers.
However now our 380s with broadcom controllers fail almost evertime with the previous and get stuck in a boot loop.Awesome work, i really appreciate everything you guys are doing.
-
[quote=“Buddy, post: 28536, member: 225”]I just tried the f473 undionly.kpxe and got the attached error.
I too was having the 0x040ee119[/quote]
The error I’m seeing here seems to be of the type of error where something is configured improperly. Possibly due to a schema update? Or the IP it’s using to get the info isn’t correct? The error presented is NOT the 040ee119, so the question remains, with the f473 it’s booting, but giving a different message. With this f473 undionly, are you still getting the 040ee119 message?
-
[quote=“Seb, post: 28602, member: 7969”]Both undionly.kkpxe and undionly.kpxe work 100% of the time for my Dell 3010s with realtek controllers.
However now our 380s with broadcom controllers fail almost evertime with the previous and get stuck in a boot loop.Awesome work, i really appreciate everything you guys are doing. :)[/quote]
Thanks for the support. With which undionly are you getting the issues with the 380’s? And which error?
-
[quote=“Tom Elliott, post: 28603, member: 7271”]The error I’m seeing here seems to be of the type of error where something is configured improperly. Possibly due to a schema update? Or the IP it’s using to get the info isn’t correct? The error presented is NOT the 040ee119, so the question remains, with the f473 it’s booting, but giving a different message. With this f473 undionly, are you still getting the 040ee119 message?[/quote]
With the f473 the 040ee119 went away. Now the “Operation not supported” error is in its place. I can work on 90% of our computers without issues, but the others get stuck on boot. Seems to be the same computers that the 040ee119 was effecting.
-
That doesn’t sound like a problem with undionly. Normally, the error you’re now presented with, is if it can’t communicate with the server, or there’s a schema update needed which isn’t returning the values properly for the boot menu.
I’ve built many rev’s, yesterday, of testing the undionly/ipxe files and the “GOOD” and the “BAD” have been labeled as such. If it’s an undionly problem, try a later revision.
The rev’s I have are labeled, so you can try either or all of them, just use the “GOOD” tagged ones. If you feel like trying to help narrow where the issue use, go ahead and try the TEST labeled files.
f3d42 (most current) “BAD”
aaf2 (mid between f473 and f3d42) “GOOD”
7aa6 (mid between aaf2 and f3d42) “BAD”
57933 (mid between 7aa6 and aaf2) “GOOD”
277f (mid between 57933 and f3d42) “GOOD”
6f410 (mid between 277f and f3d42) “BAD”
6931 (mid between 6f410 and 277f) “BAD” <- FIRST BAD COMMIT
71ed (mid between 6931 and 277f) “GOOD” -
[quote=“Tom Elliott, post: 28604, member: 7271”]Thanks for the support. With which undionly are you getting the issues with the 380’s? And which error?[/quote]
Both undionly.kpxe and undionly.kkpxe on [url]https://mastacontrola.com/ipxe/f473-GOOD/[/url] provide very similar results (100% working on dell 3010)
It is the same 040ee119 error on the 380s, it then reboots and trys again.
I have also since found that dell 755 and 760 have the same issue.So it seems like just our older models.
-
[quote=“Seb, post: 28626, member: 7969”]Both undionly.kpxe and undionly.kkpxe on [url]https://mastacontrola.com/ipxe/f473-GOOD/[/url] provide very similar results (100% working on dell 3010)
It is the same 040ee119 error on the 380s, it then reboots and trys again.
I have also since found that dell 755 and 760 have the same issue.So it seems like just our older models.[/quote]
Try using the ipxe.kkpxe for your environment to see if that will fix your “Old” system issues.
-
Ok went through about 10 of the different undionly.kpxe and still have the problem. Is there anyway I can for a schema update again? I tried to re-run the installer and it said it didn’t need it - so it skipped it. Should I be trying both the ipxe.kpxe and the undionly.kpxe? We have imaged some machines so everything else looks ok. Also it still appears to be affecting only dell 990’s. We pushed the current firmware and no difference.
-
Hello All,
iPXE Developers acknowledged an issue with the iPXE software and has pushed a potential fix for the problem. As always, the files are on my website at: [url]https://mastacontrola.com/ipxe/[/url]
The rev number to test is: d6300-DEFAULT-TEST but all of our pre-tests appear to be successful of this 040ee119 issue. If this error occurs now, it’s likely an actual DHCP issue rather than a problem with the software as it was before.
As the prospects seem good at the moment, I’ve pushed SVN 1769 and 1770 with all of the undionly/ipxe files in svn trunk. undionly.kpxe is the one that we want to work, but if it isn’t working for your systems, try one of the kkpxe or pxe files as your undionly.kpxe.
[url]https://svn.code.sf.net/p/freeghost/code/trunk/packages/tftp[/url] is the location.
Special thanks to Wolfbane8653 for testing all of these and keeping an amazing log that we could easily track and find out where the issue was.
The FOG Dev team took many build as you can guess, but we don’t have all the hardware or issues others were having. I hope this is the end-all-be-all fix for this issue, and thank you all for the patience. The FOG Dev team’s debugging, suggestions, patience, and testing was instrumental in finding what we could do to “fix” the issue which lead to the iPXE dev team to find an entirely separate, but related, issue with this problem.
So again, I thank you all personally and understand your frustration but appreciate your patience with this. I think I speak for the entire Dev team in saying thank you all very much.
Now on to the regularly scheduled updates. Go forth and test and report as normal. If you’re still having issue please don’t hesitate to let us know so we can track and help further.
Thank you,
-
This newest Undionly.kpxe is working for my DC 7900’s.
-
Bit of a noob on this - but do I just literally download the files that are provided in the link and replace them with the files that are in the boot folder? or is there something else I should do?
-
the tftpboot folder, yes
-
Hi,
Another day, another bash at trying to get this working again…
I’ve replaced the files in the tftpboot folder with the files in the above link, and when I PXE boot from the client now I get IP Address etc (as before) it shows as version iPXE 1.0.0+ (d630) I get a message saying configuring … OK
then I get/defaut.ipxe… No such file or directory
and just sits there
Any thoughts?
Cheers
Matt
-
My guess is this is an issue of the tftp server not being located at the proper location.
See if your FOG server has /var/lib/tftp or /var/lib/tftpboot. Verify that the /tftpboot/default.ipxe file exists, if it does and one of the other directories exist as well, try:
[code]ln -s /tftpboot/default.ipxe /var/lib/{WHICHEVER}/default.ipxe[/code] Try booting again and hopefully all will start working. -
Hi Tom,
OK my server has only a /var/lib/tftpboot folder BUT does not have any files inside of it… where will I find a copy of the correct default.ipxe to put inside of it?
I’m hoping that this will then fix the issue?!?
Thanks
Matt
-
You should have a a folder in your root called /tftpboot. If not then you will need to re-install fog.
-
and copied it now into /var/lib/tftpboot - I know get the FOG boot menu
BUT
If I now click on Quick Image I get as shown in the attached image…
[url=“/_imported_xf_attachments/0/877_IMG_2051.JPG?:”]IMG_2051.JPG[/url]
-
I think i may have spoken too soon about my HP 7900’s. It works fine on a box i’ve been building for a new user. But several of them in production had issues with Looping restarts this morning. Escaping out of PXE boot mode allows them to get going.
There are no hardware differences between the boxes. Only their physical location is different, and therefore they may not share some of the same switches/networking gear. They are both in the same office building, network, subnet, DHCP server, are all the same.
I’m going to pack the new box out to the station that was having trouble and test it there to see if that makes a difference. I’ll let you know.
-
Wow never expected that result.
Yes there appears to be something in the network itself causing this newer problem. Took my test machine out to the “Production” workstation and it too failed to boot (reboot loop). Brought it back to the “Test” desk and it works fine.
Grabbed the box from the “Production” workstation and brought it to my “test” desk. It booted up flawlessly.
Upon initial inspection, the only major difference in network protocol is that the “Test” desk is 10/100, while the “Production” desk is running on gigabit.
Further inspection denotes that all the core switches are either Dell Powerconnect, or Netgear Prosafe Gigabits. The “Test” desk has a cheap-o C-net 10/100 24 port to give me the number of ports i need at the desk which effectively drops the network speed to 10/100 for that cable run. The “Production” desk is running directly off the core switches at full Gigabit speed.
I then pulled the cable from my 10/100 switch and tried booting a pc directly on the “Test” desk from the direct line, without the 10/100 switch reducing the transmission speed. Reboot loop occured once again.
Therefore i must conclude that there is an issue with Undionly and gigabit speeds.
