Re: Can an iMac 24" with Core2 Duo run Debian AMD64?
I have successfully used debian-mac-8.7.1-amd64-netinst.iso to install a 64-bit OS on a Mac mini 2,1, which also has a 64-bit capable Core 2 Duo and a 32bit EFI. Perhaps a current debian-mac-x.x.x-amd64-netinst.iso from http://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/release/current/amd64/iso-cd/ will also work on an iMac with similar issues. If I remember correctly it installed GRUB, but I later switched to rEFInd. The wiki page for the Intel Mac mini might be of interest: https://wiki.debian.org/MacMiniIntel#Macmini_2.2C1 On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 4:52 PM, Robert Goley wrote: > Yes it can but you have to install differently. That series of mac has > some different 32bit/64 bit EFI type issues. It is best to use a regular > non EFI installer to install Linux on it. I had a macbook with the same > type of issue. The error you pasted is exactly the same one I encountered > when installers started incorporating the EFI installers. I no longer have > that hardware so haven't done an install in some time so I can't tell you > where/ how to get an installer without EFI enabled. Worst case, you could > do a minimal install of an older version and then dist-upgrade to the > latest version. You could also do a chroot install from a bootable > livecd. You should be able to find an installer with EFI disabled though. > > On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 10:40 AM, Steven Grunza > wrote: > >> I tried booting Debian 9.2.0 live netinstall and live. >> >> Both started up and gave a black screen with white writing and then a >> screen similar to: >> >>1. >> >>2. >> Select CD-ROM Boot Type :_ >> >> >> Nothing I did on the attached USB keyboard had any affect, nor did >> anything I did with the mouse. >> >> >> >> I received the machine from someone that upgraded to a newer machine. >> The hard drive was mostly wiped clean and Apple no longer supports the >> over-the-network install. >> >> My hope was to replace an iMac G5 (running Xubuntu) with this machine >> since the G5 is so incredibly slow (radeon driver issues most likely). >> >> Any suggestions on how to get the machine running x86_64 would be welcome >> - I'm hoping to be able to build Android and Android apps on the machine so >> it needs to be 64-bit. >> >> Steven G. >> > > > > -- > >
Re: Fwd: /bin/sh linked to dash? SOLVED, however..
On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 08:24, Francesco Pietra wrote: > AMBER has now promised to point sh to dash in next versions of their > packages. > francesco > I hope you meant bash (not dash) in the above, otherwise it will not help. -- Frederik
Re: rollback after software upgrade
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 19:43, wrote: > There's a discussion on the monotone-devel mailing list about putting /etc > under revision control. Of course one of the problems there is that Debian > packages do some configuring when being installed, so there aren't files > for a vendor branch anywhere in sight. Have you looked at the package 'etckeeper'. It does exactly that. Only with git, mercurial, bazaar or darcs though. Frederik -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-amd64-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/aanlktinqlwh+yjzqxqspgm5v_hnvkgpkdew0bs6cu...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Intel Core2Duo (T7400)
On 11/6/07, Wolfgang Mader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I want to by a MacBook which ist powered by an Inter Core2Duo (T7400). I was > not able to figure out which debian port is the right. Is ist IA64 (the Intel > 64-bit port) or amd64. The Intel Core2 Duo implements EM64T, which is basically Intel's name for amd64 (also called x86-64). You should definately pick the amd64 port (or maybe i386) for your MacBook. The IA64 port is for Intel's Itanium processors. Frederik -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: xorg 7.0 (glx problems--Error: couldn't find RGB GLX visual)
* rickh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Jun 08. 2006 14:27]: > Frederik Juul Christiani-2 wrote: > > > > $ sudo apt-get install -t unstable mesa-swx11-source > > $ sudo apt-get build-dep xserver-xorg-core > > $ sudo apt-get install fakeroot > > $ apt-get source xserver-xorg-core > > $ cd xorg-server-1.0.2/ > > $ dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot > > $ cd .. > > $ sudo dpkg -i xserver-xorg-core_1.0.2-8_amd64.deb > > Didn't get far. 2nd instruction, $ sudo apt-get build-dep > xserver-xorg-core, returns: > E: Could not open file > /var/lib/apt/lists/debian.mirror.frontiernet.net_debian_dists_testing_main_source_Sources > - open (2 No such file or directory) Do you have the following line in /etc/apt/sources.list ? deb-src http://debian.mirror.frontiernet.net/debian/ testing main Make sure you do, and follow up with "sudo apt-get update". I hope this helps. Frederik -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: xorg 7.0 (glx problems--Error: couldn't find RGB GLX visual)
* rickh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Jun 07. 2006 18:56]: > When you say you 'installed' mesa-swx11-source, I assume you > mean that you did compile/make. That doesn't intimidate me. > ... But, if 'rebuilding and installing xserver-xorg-core' means > you also compiled that from source, ... I'm hesitant. I meant the latter. It really isn't as scary as it apparently sounds. $ sudo apt-get install -t unstable mesa-swx11-source $ sudo apt-get build-dep xserver-xorg-core $ sudo apt-get install fakeroot $ apt-get source xserver-xorg-core $ cd xorg-server-1.0.2/ $ dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot $ cd .. $ sudo dpkg -i xserver-xorg-core_1.0.2-8_amd64.deb It worked for me. Let us know the results if you decide to try it. It probably isn't necessary to build all 6 binary packages from xorg-server, but I don't know how to do that easily. Anyone? > It appears that, given time, the problem will be corrected by > normal upgrades, but I am tired of living without GLX. I this > process is not risky for an 'intermediate (at best) user, I'll > try it. But I would like a little more encouragement. Go for it! You can always reinstall the package from testing if you tire of GLX :) Frederik -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: xorg 7.0 (glx problems--Error: couldn't find RGB GLX visual)
* Richard Mace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Jun 05. 2006 22:27]: > Now, when I type glxinfo I get the following output: > > $ LIBGL_DEBUG=verbose glxinfo > name of display: :0.0 > Error: couldn't find RGB GLX visual You seem to have been bitten by bug #364233 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=364233 Installing the new mesa-swx11-source from unstable followed by rebuilding and installing xserver-xorg-core fixed the problem for me. Good luck. Frederik -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: sources.list
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Aug 05. 2005 00:25]: > from http://amd64.debian.net/README.mirrors.txt > > If I put in sources.list this entry > > deb http://debian.inode.at/debian-amd64/debian/sarge main contrib ^^ You are missing a space between "debian/" and "sarge". It should read deb http://debian.inode.at/debian-amd64/debian/ sarge main contrib Frederik -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Installation on SATA drive
* Chetan Thapliyal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Jul 16. 2005 19:58]: > I have downloaded the latest debian64 image > (debian-31r0a-ia64-binary-1.iso) from debian.org. I burnt the image and > try to install but system didn't autoboot through CD-ROM. I also tried IA64 is not the same as AMD64. See https://alioth.debian.org/docman/view.php/30192/21/debian-amd64-howto.html#id274689 Since you have an Athlon64 processor and not an Itanium one, you really should use an image from here: http://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/unofficial/sarge-amd64/ I don't know whether your mainboard is supported, but choosing the right architecture is at least a start. Frederik -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Partition size problem
* haroon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Apr 27. 2005 07:13]: > I have following partitions (as shown by cfdisk) > > hda1 ntfs~20G > hda2 ext3~9G > hda3 swap~ 1G > hda4 ext3~29G > > Total hda size ~60G now if use df to view disk space I get this > output (I have removed lines that report binded mount points) > > presario:~# df -h > FilesystemSize Used Avail Use% Mounted on > /dev/hda2 9.0G 7.1G 1.5G 83% / > /dev/hda4 9.0G 4.7G 3.9G 55% /mnt/data > /dev/hda1 20G 4.6G 15G 24% /mnt/win > > Now I am confused why size of /dev/hda4 is reported to be > different? cfdisk shows the size of the partitions, whereas df shows the size of the filesystems. It would seem that the filesystem on hda4 doesn't fill the entire partition. Something like # umount /mnt/data # resize2fs /dev/hda4 # mount /dev/hda4 /mnt/data should fix this. resize2fs will automatically resize to the size of the partition if no size option is given. I'm not sure whether resize2fs can resize mounted filesystems. It couldn't last time I used it, but that is some years ago. Frederik -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: "experimental"?
* Alexandru Cabuz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Mar 02. 2005 13:28]: > I am trying to install the octaviz package, which is in 32bit > experimental but it seems, not in amd64 experimental. (It's an > advanced plotting tool for octave) > > The AMD64 howto does not say anything about experimental > packages and a search of list archives gives nothing. You must have missed the thread starting with this post: http://lists.debian.org/debian-amd64/2005/02/msg00274.html It includes the following: * Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Feb 11. 2005 19:50]: > Giacomo Mulas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Where is "experimental" for amd64 (if it exists)? I would > > like to test gfortran on my pure64 install, which for > > "official" debian is in experimental... > > > > Thanks > > Giacomo > > There is no buildd running for experimental amd64 currently. > You have to download the source and compile it yourself. > > MfG > Goswin So, unless something changed in the last month, there is no pure64 experimental. Frederik -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
