Your message dated Sat, 24 Aug 2013 17:57:31 +0200 with message-id <201308241758.08374.hol...@layer-acht.org> and subject line dealing with old installation-reports has caused the Debian Bug report #656696, regarding [installation-reports] third NIC could not get address via DHCP to enable install to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 656696: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=656696 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---Package: installation-reports Boot method: netinst ISO Image version: Date: 2012-01-20 Machine: VirtualBox Processor: i7-930 Memory: 8GB (host), 512MB (guest) Partitions: Filesystem Type 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on /dev/sda1 jfs 7961152 840400 7120752 11% / tmpfs tmpfs 254576 4 254572 1% /lib/init/rw udev tmpfs 249776 152 249624 1% /dev tmpfs tmpfs 254576 0 254576 0% /dev/shm Output of lspci -knn (or lspci -nn): 00:02.0 VGA compatible controller [0300]: InnoTek Systemberatung GmbH VirtualBox Graphics Adapter [80ee:beef] 00:04.0 System peripheral [0880]: InnoTek Systemberatung GmbH VirtualBox Guest Service [80ee:cafe] 00:07.0 Bridge [0680]: Intel Corporation 82371AB/EB/MB PIIX4 ACPI [8086:7113] (rev 08) 00:08.0 Ethernet controller [0200]: Intel Corporation 82545EM Gigabit Ethernet Controller (Copper) [8086:100f] (rev 02) 00:09.0 Ethernet controller [0200]: Intel Corporation 82545EM Gigabit Ethernet Controller (Copper) [8086:100f] (rev 02) 00:11.0 Ethernet controller [0200]: Intel Corporation 82545EM Gigabit Ethernet Controller (Copper) [8086:100f] (rev 02) 00:18.0 PCI bridge [0604]: Intel Corporation 82801 Mobile PCI Bridge [8086:2448] (rev f2) 00:19.0 PCI bridge [0604]: Intel Corporation 82801 Mobile PCI Bridge [8086:2448] (rev f2) 00:1f.0 ISA bridge [0601]: Intel Corporation 82801GBM (ICH7-M) LPC Interface Bridge [8086:27b9] (rev 02) 00:1f.2 SATA controller [0106]: Intel Corporation 82801HBM/HEM (ICH8M/ICH8M-E) SATA AHCI Controller [8086:2829] (rev 02) 00:1f.4 USB Controller [0c03]: Apple Computer Inc. KeyLargo/Intrepid USB [106b:003f] 00:1f.5 USB Controller [0c03]: Intel Corporation 82801FB/FBM/FR/FW/FRW (ICH6 Family) USB2 EHCI Controller [8086:265c] Base System Installation Checklist: [O] = OK, [E] = Error (please elaborate below), [ ] = didn't try it Initial boot: [O] Detect network card: [O] Configure network: [E] Detect CD: [O] Load installer modules: [O] Detect hard drives: [O] Partition hard drives: [O] Install base system: [O] Clock/timezone setup: [O] User/password setup: [O] Install tasks: [O] Install boot loader: [O] Overall install: [O] Comments/Problems: I used VirtualBox to install a Squeeze guest VM. The configuration had three NICs: eth0 and eth1 are internal networks (with no DHCP) and eth2 is NAT'd with DHCP. Even though I selected eth2 in the installer, DHCP failed. I went back into the VM configuration and disabled eth0 and eth1, leaving eth2 with the NAT active. I was then able to install. Afterwards I shut down, re-enabled eth0 and eth1, booted, and fixed up udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules and /etc/network/interfaces and everything worked fine. I wonder if there is something in the installer that prevents the third interface from being able to successfully get an address via DHCP. (I didn't try doing the same but with only two interfaces: one with NAT and DHCP and the other without as I have successfully installed in that configuration before on physical hardware.) -- Mark Gardner --
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---Hi, thank you for submitting installation reports, much appreciated. I read through all the bugs mentioned here (and I'm sure they were read by several people at the time they were submitted) and am closing them now as/if - they (finally) indicated success and/or - I know from first hand experience that the functionality is working in Wheezy and/or - they only contained very little information and/or - they contained user errors and/or - they were caused by broken hardware and/or - they have been from a development phase where things were not stable and/or - they are quite old (and thus likely fixed today). If I've closed a bug incorrectly please do reply (it's easy to reopen and I'll do if requested) or just file a new one - thats often better, as the bug log will be clearer and shorter and not contain cruft. cheers, Holgersignature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
--- End Message ---