Re: sun-java5-plugin on amd64
Am Dienstag, 23. Mai 2006 14:28 schrieb Jean-Luc Coulon (f5ibh): > Le 23.05.2006 06:28:08, Hans a écrit : > > Am Montag, 22. Mai 2006 18:39 schrieb Wolfgang Mader: > > > Does this work for you? > > > If I add this line to source.list and update I get: > > > Can not access list /var/lib/apt/lists/geole...-amd64_Packages > > > > > > If I look under /var/lib/apt/lists there is a list for geole, but > > > > only with > > > > > i386 entries? Any hint? > > > > > > Cheers W. Mader > > > > Hi ! > > Well, I put this in my sources.list and installed it as normal. > > And it works ! Just try it. If it does not work, you can always > > deinstall it. > > I've tried it. > But it failed to load the Packages files. It should be there. I looked into the repository, and there are amd64-packages, too. Please take a look: http://debian.geole.de/pool/non-free/s/ Please do as told here: http://wiki.tvbrowser.org/index.php/Weitere_Pakete This should work. The correct entry in sources.list should be: For Sarge: deb http://debian.geole.de/ sarge main contrib non-free For Etch: deb http://debian.geole.de/ etch main contrib non-free For Sid: deb http://debian.geole.de/ sid main contrib non-free Remember, apt decides which packkages it should install regarding to your system automatically. There are no different entries in sources.list for amd64 and i386 any more. Does this help ? Best regards Hans > > > Best regards > > > > Hans > > Jean-Luc -- Firma Ullrich-IT-Consult Inh.: Hans-J. Ullrich Münstedter Weg 10 31246 Oberg Tel.: 0160 8156 079 www: http://www.ullrich-it.de Linux-Beratung für Server und Clients * IT-Sicherheit * Seminare und Workshops -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: counting scsi hosts
On 05/23/06 04:42:26PM +0200, H. Wilmer wrote: > Jim Crilly wrote: > > >anything by compiling them in statically. I'm looking at it from the other > >direction, with initrd so easy to create, what's the advantage of not using > >modules? > > Ok, maybe it's just me thinking that I gain reliability whith some > things compiled in and others not, in an attempt to take advantage of > both approaches :) > > > GH Not in any way that I can think of, the only thing it does is simplify booting a very little bit by not requiring an initrd. Jim. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dual booting 64-bit and 32-bit kernels
El mar, 23-05-2006 a las 10:09 +0100, A J Stiles escribió:
> If I partition my drive appropriately, can I use LILO to dual-boot a 32-bit
> kernel and a 64-bit kernel with {at least} a shared /home and swap space,
> but separate / partitions?
>
> I think it should be possible, this way, to keep all the nasty binary-only
> stuff tucked out of the way in a directory which won't even appear when the
> system is booted in 64-bit mode.
>
> But I thought I'd ask first, incase someone knows of a good reason I have not
> thought of why this won't work.
>
> --
> AJS
> delta echo bravo six four at earthshod dot co dot uk
>
>
Hi,
yes, it should work. I have DEbian AMD64 and 32 bits with common /home
partition and swap, and separated root partition.
Problems may occur if you install, for instance, a Debian and an Ubuntu.
Re: Dual booting 64-bit and 32-bit kernels
On 5/23/06, A J Stiles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If I partition my drive appropriately, can I use LILO to dual-boot a 32-bitkernel and a 64-bit kernel with {at least} a shared /home and swap space,but separate / partitions?I use such configuration with GRUB but I don't see any reason why this shouldn't work with LILO as well.
I can boot into either the 64- or the 32-bit system, additionally I have configured my chroot (in the 64-bit environment) to point into the same 32-bit partition as well. For me this is the ideal setup allowing me to work in 64-bit by default, have the few 32-bit applications (OpenOffice, Firefox Flash plugin etc.) chrooted, but still having a fully functional 32-bit installation in the backhand.
However, I would be very much interested whether it is possible to share other partitions between the installations as well (/etc in particular)... any experiences?-- Best regards / Mit den besten Grüssen
Sven Krahn
Re: Uninstall 32bit env
"antonio giulio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> the chroot is only a directory and could be removed as usually, ... >> > >> > sorry misunderstanding for my bad english:) >> > >> > is it possible run firefox32 and wine32 by "lib32"-package? >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Giulio >> >> firefox I believe not yet. wine yes. > > On Suse (10.1) running firefox is possible with flash plugin on amd64 > without using "chroot 32 env". > > Giulio On Suse you get a cameleon. Debian will give you a swirl instead. Things differ. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Uninstall 32bit env
>> the chroot is only a directory and could be removed as usually, ... > > sorry misunderstanding for my bad english:) > > is it possible run firefox32 and wine32 by "lib32"-package? > > Thanks, > Giulio firefox I believe not yet. wine yes. On Suse (10.1) running firefox is possible with flash plugin on amd64 without using "chroot 32 env". Giulio
Re: Still having random crashes after installing X with nvidia
> On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 08:48:44AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > Unless I get some help from this list, the next thing I'll be trying is > > going throuth the list of optional addons to X that dpkg-reconfigure > > xorg-server provides and taking them out. Things like direct rendering > > and GL support and such. Is this likely to keep nvidia's openGL suport > > from working? > > Well! turning all that stuff off stops the crashes. > Would it be useful trying to isolate the problem to one of > those options, maybe by a kind of binary search? > I.e. are there people interested in getting a report and trying to > fix the problem, or are the comm channels to nvidia (I presume that's > where the reports have to go) hopelessly clogged? Yes, please post your report for the archives. The Nvidia docs say that the dri and GLCore modules should not be used in combination with their glx module. So be sure to comment those out-- maybe the source of your trouble here. Good luck, Andrew. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Uninstall 32bit env
"antonio giulio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> the chroot is only a directory and could be removed as usually, ... > > sorry misunderstanding for my bad english:) > > is it possible run firefox32 and wine32 by "lib32"-package? > > Thanks, > Giulio firefox I believe not yet. wine yes. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dual booting 64-bit and 32-bit kernels
A J Stiles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If I partition my drive appropriately, can I use LILO to dual-boot a 32-bit
> kernel and a 64-bit kernel with {at least} a shared /home and swap space,
> but separate / partitions?
>
> I think it should be possible, this way, to keep all the nasty binary-only
> stuff tucked out of the way in a directory which won't even appear when the
> system is booted in 64-bit mode.
>
> But I thought I'd ask first, incase someone knows of a good reason I have not
> thought of why this won't work.
Except for some things like kde or gnome programs that have
architecture depended .something files in your home directroy there is
no problem.
If you find any such programs please file a bug so it can be
corrected.
MfG
Goswin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Which AMD64 installer iso to use?
Karl Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > OK - this is rather strange. > > There are iso downloads at : > > http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-installer/ This is just the general overview page and links isos from other places. > and at > > http://amd64.debian.net/debian/dists/testing/main/installer-amd64/beta2/images/netboot/mini.iso > > The daily builds listed at Daily builds are afaik still stoped waiting for the official archive to get all the required packages into etch. So any image you see is probably rather old. Check the timestamp. > http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-installer/ > > seem to have older bugs than the ones at > > http://amd64.debian.net/debian/dists/testing/main/installer-amd64/beta2/images/netboot/mini.iso > > > I think the mini.iso has fixed my problems that I have been sending > installation reports on. > > Can someone clarify what the difference is between the iso's available > from the 2 urls? The Debian Installer itself builds the kernel image and ramdisks needed to build the full installer CDs but it also builds the netboot/mini.iso since that only contains kernel and ramdisk. All other CD images are then build from those images with the help of debian-cd in a different process. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: counting scsi hosts
Jim Crilly wrote: anything by compiling them in statically. I'm looking at it from the other direction, with initrd so easy to create, what's the advantage of not using modules? Ok, maybe it's just me thinking that I gain reliability whith some things compiled in and others not, in an attempt to take advantage of both approaches :) GH -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: counting scsi hosts
On 05/23/06 02:34:35PM +0200, H. Wilmer wrote: > Jim Crilly wrote: > > >More stuff is configurable without a recompile. If I add/change hardware I > >don't have to do anything unless it's something required for booting and > >even then updating my initrd is simple. And I have run into cases where > >reloading modules will fix things, > > Ok, that are advantages to be made use of. But when hardware is not > about to be changed and it's for a server that should just run the way > it is reliably, what's the advantage of using modules for things > required to boot anyway? MOTT, you could not even unload those modules. > > Even with servers there's a good chance you'll have to replace hardware and with the way companies tend to change chipsets and revisions without changing names it's still safer to just use modules. IMO You don't gain anything by compiling them in statically. I'm looking at it from the other direction, with initrd so easy to create, what's the advantage of not using modules? Jim. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: install-mbr on amd64?
On Sat, May 20, 2006 at 02:09:27PM +0200, Alexander Sieck wrote: > Goswin is right. I have installed etch on amd64 and configured > RAID1, LVM and grub in d-i. > > # BEGIN-CLI > deb64a:~# df > Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on > /dev/md1 1829101189101 1542410 11% / > /dev/md0 60093 19372 37515 35% /boot > ... > # END-CLI > > After the installation only the MBR on /dev/sda contains meaningful > data, whereas the MBR on /dev/sdb contains mostly zeros. True. You have to install grub to both drives, and the installer only does it to one of them. Easily fixed manually. > # BEGIN-CLI > deb64a:~# dd if=/dev/sda bs=512 count=1 | od -v | head -n 12 > 1+0 records in > 1+0 records out > 512 bytes (512 B) copied, 2.2e-05 seconds, 23.3 MB/s > 000 044353 150220 000274 175574 003520 017520 137374 076033 > 020 015677 050006 134527 000745 122363 136713 003676 002261 > 040 067070 076000 072411 101423 010305 172342 014315 172613 > 060 143203 044420 014564 026070 173164 132640 132007 001003 > 100 000377 02 01 00 001000 100372 100312 051752 > 120 000174 030400 107300 107330 136320 02 120373 076100 > 140 177474 001164 141210 137122 076571 032350 173001 100302 > 160 052164 040664 125273 146525 055023 071122 100511 052773 > 200 072652 120103 076101 140204 002565 160603 072001 063067 > 220 046213 137020 076005 042306 000777 105546 042036 143574 > 240 010004 143400 001104 01 104546 004134 042307 06 > 260 063160 140061 042211 063004 042211 132014 146502 071023 > > deb64a:~# dd if=/dev/sdb bs=512 count=1 | od -v | head -n 12 > 1+0 records in > 1+0 records out > 512 bytes (512 B) copied, 2.1e-05 seconds, 24.4 MB/s > 000 134372 01 150216 000274 134260 00 154216 140216 > 020 137373 076000 000277 134406 001000 122363 020752 06 > 040 137000 003676 002070 005565 143203 100420 177376 072407 > 060 165763 132026 130002 135401 076000 100262 072212 105401 > 100 001114 011715 000352 000174 165400 000376 00 00 > 120 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 > 140 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 > 160 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 > 200 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 > 220 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 > 240 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 > 260 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 > # END-CLI > > After running 'grub-install' on /dev/sdb, both MBRs, on /dev/sda > and /dev/sdb, contain the right data. > > # BEGIN-CLI > deb64a:~# grub-install --root-directory=/boot --no-floppy /dev/sdb > Probing devices to guess BIOS drives. This may take a long time. > Installation finished. No error reported. > This is the contents of the device map /boot/boot/grub/device.map. > Check if this is correct or not. If any of the lines is incorrect, > fix it and re-run the script `grub-install'. > > (hd0) /dev/sda > (hd1) /dev/sdb > > deb64a:~# dd if=/dev/sda bs=512 count=1 | od -v | head -n 12 > 1+0 records in > 1+0 records out > 512 bytes (512 B) copied, 0.000638 seconds, 803 kB/s > 000 044353 150220 000274 175574 003520 017520 137374 076033 > 020 015677 050006 134527 000745 122363 136713 003676 002261 > 040 067070 076000 072411 101423 010305 172342 014315 172613 > 060 143203 044420 014564 026070 173164 132640 132007 001003 > 100 000377 02 01 00 001000 100372 100312 051752 > 120 000174 030400 107300 107330 136320 02 120373 076100 > 140 177474 001164 141210 137122 076571 032350 173001 100302 > 160 052164 040664 125273 146525 055023 071122 100511 052773 > 200 072652 120103 076101 140204 002565 160603 072001 063067 > 220 046213 137020 076005 042306 000777 105546 042036 143574 > 240 010004 143400 001104 01 104546 004134 042307 06 > 260 063160 140061 042211 063004 042211 132014 146502 071023 > deb64a:~# dd if=/dev/sdb bs=512 count=1 | od -v | head -n 12 > 1+0 records in > 1+0 records out > 512 bytes (512 B) copied, 0.013082 seconds, 39.1 kB/s > 000 044353 010220 150216 000274 134260 00 154216 140216 > 020 137373 076000 000277 134406 001000 122363 020752 06 > 040 137000 003676 002070 005565 143203 100420 177376 072407 > 060 165763 132026 130002 135401 076000 100262 072212 001003 > 100 000201 02 01 00 001000 110372 173220 100302 > 120 001165 100262 054752 000174 030400 107300 107330 136320 > 140 02 120373 076100 177474 001164 141210 137122 076577 > 160 032350 173001 100302 052164 040664 125273 146525 055023 > 200 071122 100511 052773 072652 120103 076101 140204 002565 > 220 160603 072001 063067 046213 137020 076005 042306 000777 > 240 105546 042036 143574 010004 143400 001104 01 104546 > 260 004134 042307 06 063160 140061 042211 063
Re: install-mbr on amd64?
On Sat, May 20, 2006 at 02:07:54AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > Then pull a disk (the right one) and see it stop booting. From > grub-install: > > # Usage: getraid_mdadm mddevice > # Routine to find a physical device from an md device > # If found, the first grub BIOS device (from device.map) is returned > # If no BIOS drives match the RAID devices, the first device returned > # from mdadm -D is returned > > Only one of your disks is bootable. By setting up each device in > device.map in turn you get grub on each of them. I run grub-install /dev/sda and /dev/sdb, and both disks are perfectly bootable. I have tested this. Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: install-mbr on amd64?
On Sat, May 20, 2006 at 09:28:07PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > man grub-install: >grub-install copies GRUB images into the DIR/boot directory specfied by >--root-directory, and uses the grub shell to install grub into the boot >sector. > > Your command line would install to /boot/boot/. > > grub-install --no-floppy /dev/md0 grub-install seems to have issues with seperate boot partitions. If you create a symlink inside boot called boot pointing to itself, then grub-install is fine with it. cd /boot; ln -s . boot With that there is no problem with grub on raid1 /boot. With boot in / on raid1 it just works. Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: counting scsi hosts
Jim Crilly wrote: More stuff is configurable without a recompile. If I add/change hardware I don't have to do anything unless it's something required for booting and even then updating my initrd is simple. And I have run into cases where reloading modules will fix things, Ok, that are advantages to be made use of. But when hardware is not about to be changed and it's for a server that should just run the way it is reliably, what's the advantage of using modules for things required to boot anyway? MOTT, you could not even unload those modules. GH -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Which AMD64 installer iso to use?
This is further confusing me. I reported last night to this list of successful (up to the stage of partitioning disks, when I had to delay the process because it was getting too late and I was unable from manual partitioning to get the tool for partitioning) installation of amd64 debian testing with Tyan K8WE with two dual 265 amd opteron starting from installer as downloaded yesterday from http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-installer/ Now I wanted to resume the process, hopefully to a complete installation of raid1 and chroot 32 when I read about the mini.iso below (5MB against the nearly 100 of the installer I used. I stop again going on until I understand. Thank you francesco pietra On Tuesday 23 May 2006 01:35, Karl Schmidt wrote: > OK - this is rather strange. > > There are iso downloads at : > > http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-installer/ > > and at > > http://amd64.debian.net/debian/dists/testing/main/installer-amd64/beta2/ima >ges/netboot/mini.iso > > The daily builds listed at > > http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-installer/ > > seem to have older bugs than the ones at > > http://amd64.debian.net/debian/dists/testing/main/installer-amd64/beta2/ima >ges/netboot/mini.iso > > > I think the mini.iso has fixed my problems that I have been sending > installation reports on. > > Can someone clarify what the difference is between the iso's available from > the 2 urls? > > > > > > > Karl Schmidt EMail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Transtronics, Inc. WEB http://xtronics.com > 3209 West 9th StreetPh (785) 841-3089 > Lawrence, KS 66049 FAX (785) 841-0434 > > > If our brain was simple enough to understand, > we would be to simple too understand it. > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dual booting 64-bit and 32-bit kernels
A J Stiles wrote:
> If I partition my drive appropriately, can I use LILO to dual-boot a 32-bit
> kernel and a 64-bit kernel with {at least} a shared /home and swap space,
> but separate / partitions?
>
> I think it should be possible, this way, to keep all the nasty binary-only
> stuff tucked out of the way in a directory which won't even appear when the
> system is booted in 64-bit mode.
>
> But I thought I'd ask first, incase someone knows of a good reason I have not
> thought of why this won't work.
>
Greetings:
I do that with my machine (using grub rather than lilo, though) without
any major problems. The only problem that I've run into has to do with
having both the 32-bit and 64-bit version of a program installed.
Sometimes the two versions have different ideas about configuration
files and data file formats that it stores in /home. If the program has
a conversion process for converting data files from 32-bit to 64-bit,
then you will have problems if you try to run both versions on your machine.
-Scott
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Uninstall 32bit env
the chroot is only a directory and could be removed as usually, ... sorry misunderstanding for my bad english:) is it possible run firefox32 and wine32 by "lib32"-package? Thanks, Giulio
Re: sun-java5-plugin on amd64
Le 23.05.2006 06:28:08, Hans a écrit : Am Montag, 22. Mai 2006 18:39 schrieb Wolfgang Mader: > Does this work for you? > If I add this line to source.list and update I get: > Can not access list /var/lib/apt/lists/geole...-amd64_Packages > > If I look under /var/lib/apt/lists there is a list for geole, but only with > i386 entries? Any hint? > > Cheers W. Mader > Hi ! Well, I put this in my sources.list and installed it as normal. And it works ! Just try it. If it does not work, you can always deinstall it. I've tried it. But it failed to load the Packages files. Best regards Hans Jean-Luc pgpeIEe56AfPN.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: amd64 installation
Hi Alexander: I need a large disk space during the computations. As already reported preliminarily, I started positively with pure 64 (testing installer), aimed at 32 chroot. I'll resume the installation later today. Hardware was recognized (and etherned was OK on nviadia, not on ethernet or fast ethernet) but the hard step today is X. I hope to issue another positive report. regards francesco pietra On Tuesday 23 May 2006 00:11, Alexander Samad wrote: > On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 04:49:18PM +0200, Francesco Pietra wrote: > > I forgot a key point: my move to 64 is essentially to double the floating > > point for the package mpqc, which i use on 32 but it is available as a > > debian package for the testing. To write papers, sending mail or > > navigating on internet i would have not thought to 64bit. > > why not use the 32 userland with the 64 kernel, which should allow you > to install and run your 64 bit app - with the appropiate libraries of > course, best of both worlds > > > Hi Craig: > > > > I decided to follow your 2nd suggestion (for a non expert like me) to > > install permanently ubuntu 5.10, albeit with much regret because I had > > always loved the debian environment, people in the first place. I > > downloaded the ubuntu *.iso and wrote the ISO 9660 but I forgot to check > > before the list of hardware on ubuntu. Well, the Tyan below (Tyan K8WE > > S2895 nvidia nForce pro 2200 and 2050) is not listed as supported; only > > older Tyans. Try nonetheless? Doubtuful with kernel 2.6.12.6 of ubuntu > > 5.10 > > > > On the other hand, Goswin answered my mail below advising (for my > > particular needs and capability) to avoid debian and go to > > . Again a rather old kernel and thus probably no support to the > > Tyan mainboard. > > > > The alternative is trying with the debian testing installer (may be by > > paving the way through a ubuntu amd64 live CD??) but I strongly rely on > > Goswin's indications. But this seems to me the only viable route. > > > > Maybe I am overcomplicating the problem but I halted for a while any > > trial until I exit my present confusion. > > > > I hope not to bother all you too much > > > > regards > > francesco pietra > > > > On Monday 22 May 2006 08:06, Craig Hagerman wrote: > > > When I did a fresh install of Debian amd64 (couple years ago?) I > > > booted from a live CD (ubuntu has a 64 bit live CD) and did everything > > > from there. ie. partition the disk, create a chroot to where you want > > > the deb root partition, install debootstrap etc and go from there. > > > > > > If you are that hesitant about doing an installation yourself, why > > > don't you just download a copy of Ubuntu for amd64. I have computers > > > running both. the differences are minor, but the installation is > > > completely painless with Ubuntu, whereas I have never been able to say > > > that about Debian. With Ubuntu the installation is pretty automated > > > and lots of things just work ... things that I have to fight to get > > > working in Debian (realplayer anyone?). > > > > > > Craig > > > > > > On 5/22/06, Francesco Pietra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hi all: > > > > I have followed with particular attention in the last few days all > > > > issues on this list related to amd64 debian installation. Just > > > > because I have now finally everything ready for a fresh installation > > > > on a fresh ready workstation equipped with Tyan K8WE S2895 (bearing > > > > video card Pixelview 6600 256M DDR DVI and a scsi card for external > > > > devices), a couple of dual amd64 opteron, and a couple of 300GB SATA > > > > HD. > > > > > > > > For the benefit of poor guys like me who rarely carry out software > > > > installations, could you please check my projected route, and its > > > > sequence, for suitability/correctness? > > > > > > > > 1) Start with debian installer > > > > Debian testing amd64 Bin-1/ISO9660 [93 MB] (CD-ROM waiting on my > > > > machine) burned from > > > > debian-testing-amd64-netinst.iso [93.4 MB] > > > > as downloaded yesterday from > > > > http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-installer/ > > > > > > > > 2)Follow substantially a netinstall according to Roberto's howto > > > > http://haydn.debian.org/~intero-guest/debian-amd64-howto.html > > > > > > > > 3)Establish raid1. To this regard, I am at "Today 21:19:28" > > > > directions by Alexander Siek. I understand Alexander has positively > > > > answered all (nearly all?) criticism by Goswin. However, I must > > > > confess that i use a pc with debian testing/unstable but I never > > > > established a raid before. Therefore, I only hope to be able to > > > > follow Alexander's indications but it would be better for me to read > > > > before some general instructions as to establish a raid1. I have none > > > > yet. > > > > > > > > 4)Install 32b applications into a chroot as indicated in both > > > > Roberto's howto above and, for what I need, ie not sound) in > > > > http://www.debian-administration.org/artic
Re: amd64 installation
Hi Karl: In fact I recovered from my mental mess, reasoning approximately as you below. I started yesterday (too late in the day!) the installation and sent a preliminary positive feedback to the list and in particular to Goswin - who generously helped me patiently - a preliminary positive feed back from installation with debian amd64 testing installer. It was too late to continue the installation and I'll resume the work later in the day. I was stopped at partitioning the two HDs. Although I choose manual partitioning, I was unable to find the option how to partition. But I was so sleepy. I always believed that oversimplifying may not solve the problem. Adding to your note as to beginners/linux flavor, there is another route: starting at full possibilities while associating to the next linux group. I did so for debian 32 but now in my group no one has yet tried debian 64 or an advanced mainboard as I have. Thanks for your warning and encouragement. francesco pietra On Tuesday 23 May 2006 04:49, Karl Schmidt wrote: > Not all of a move to ubuntu is good news. Be aware that it is _not_ like > Debian Stable. I tried using ubuntu to install on a AMD64 system and tried > to move to Debian stable - turned into a huge mess. > > Ubuntu could be a version of Debian with 'pinning' of certain packages and > a few special packages to set up sane defaults and a few special packages - > but that is not what it is. From what I can tell, not much that is learned > in ubuntu is going directly back to Debian. > > It may not be a bad choice for a first time Linux user. > > I found that the iso at: > http://amd64.debian.net/debian/dists/testing/main/installer-amd64/beta2/ima >ges/netboot/mini.iso > > worked better than others. > > > > Karl Schmidt EMail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Transtronics, Inc. WEB http://xtronics.com > 3209 West 9th StreetPh (785) 841-3089 > Lawrence, KS 66049 FAX (785) 841-0434 > > > Merchandise offered without price, > is sure to cost more than it is worth. -kps > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dual booting 64-bit and 32-bit kernels
If I partition my drive appropriately, can I use LILO to dual-boot a 32-bit
kernel and a 64-bit kernel with {at least} a shared /home and swap space,
but separate / partitions?
I think it should be possible, this way, to keep all the nasty binary-only
stuff tucked out of the way in a directory which won't even appear when the
system is booted in 64-bit mode.
But I thought I'd ask first, incase someone knows of a good reason I have not
thought of why this won't work.
--
AJS
delta echo bravo six four at earthshod dot co dot uk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#367771: librmagick-ruby1.8: RMagick library segfaults on startup on amd64 SMP
On Sunday 21 May 2006 17:59, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > On 17/05/06 at 17:28 -0400, kirstin penelope rhys wrote: > > Package: librmagick-ruby1.8 > > Version: 1.6.0-1 > > Severity: important > > > > Just loading the RMagick library causes a segfault. But the imagemagick > > libraries run fine. The package won't compile from source on this > > architecture. > > > > I can grab an strace or core backtrace, if you'd like. > > Hi, > > Could you try to reproduce the bug using the testing or unstable version > of the package on an AMD64 system ? (I tried, but can't) I would love too, but I'm afraid I don't have a free amd64 box to upgrade to--ours are either production or staging servers. Unless I could step the staging server back down :) > Where did you get your Debian stable package of librmagick-ruby1.8 for > amd64 ? AFAIK, amd64 is not a supported architecture for debian stable. From amd64.debian.net. amd64 sarge is an unofficial, but supported release. Perhaps I filed the bug report in the wrong place? Oh, wait. The amd64 faq says I should report it, but include X-Debbugs-CC: debian-amd64@lists.debian.org Would it be better to close this, and refile it correctly? Best, kirstin -- Parker's Law: Beauty is only skin deep, but ugly goes clean to the bone.
