CatOS rollback advice (worst-case scenario :))

ryan.lambert · ‎03-02-2010

Folks,

Just looking for a quick bit of advice. Hopefully this is the correct forum for it.

Obviously CatOS is more or less dead (I understand, and apologize for bringing back bad memories for some...), and we're in the process of making final migrations to IOS. I'm a bit rusty on my Cat-Fu, so I'm left scratching my head in confusion at some things I am seeing (and associating with my IOS brain, although that is not always applicable). I sort of inherited this issue, so give me a bit of mercy as I step through trying to fix it...

Problem is this,

I'm looking at a 'sh boot', and it would seem the config file variable is in fact set, and the mode is set to 'non-recurring'. Based on what I've read as refresher, I'm under the impression that if I pull the supervisor and have to rollback/boot on it again, it will look for this file to configure the switch. The file bootflash:switch.cfg does not exist if I 'dir bootflash'. Similarly, I cannot issue a wri mem because config mode is binary - so is it saved to NVRAM? How can I confirm this? I cannot dir nvram:

Secondly, looking at the set boot system flash: parameters within the configuration, I don't see either of the 3 images specified upon a 'dir bootflash'... so it looks like we're driving without a valid boot image at this point. I do see one of them marked as deleted (dir bootflash all). My space is limited on bootflash, so if my assumptions here are correct, I am going to need to squeeze the FS and upload a valid image via tftp.

I have attached a text file of the output for ease of reference (show ver also included).

TIA,

Ryan

ryan.lambert · ‎03-02-2010

Also just wanted to drop this tidbit in here. I did notice in the 'sh ver' it mentions it booted from bootflash:bootflash.

When I downloaded the actual version of the .bin file from Cisco's site, it was similar in size to what shows in bootflash.

Whichboot showed me this:

Boot image name is 'bootflash:bootflash'.

I am, of course, further left scratching my head because it seems like someone just renamed the image file to 'bootflash' and that is why none of this makes any sense to me.

paolo bevilacqua · ‎03-02-2010

This happens when copying images and messing up the proper CLI.

Be aware it wont boot unless boot varialble are set correctly so caveat emptor.

ryan.lambert · ‎03-02-2010

Thanks for the response.

Based on the list of set boot system * commands (attached) in the actual configuration, it doesn't appear that it will find any of them - they don't exist within bootflash. However, with the config-register set to 0x2102, I am under the impression that it will search files on bootflash for the first valid image, or is my understanding incorrect? I know certain platforms function differently with similar confreg, so I could be mixing this up a little.

If it is searching bootflash for a valid boot image, would it see this file of "bootflash" that it previously booted from as a valid image file and load it up?

I suppose if it would not correctly boot, the only real conclusion I can draw is that someone issued a "boot bootflash:bootflash" from rommon 471 days ago and never tested it afterward. I guess I am just not really certain about this one.

paolo bevilacqua · ‎03-02-2010

Which Catalyst is that ? An old 6K eg doesn't have config-register like a router. In these either all is set right, or they don't boot.

ryan.lambert · ‎03-02-2010

It's a 6513 chassis with Sup2