Re: bad mirror list in 3.1r3 netinst
dann frazier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Who is a good contact for debian.csail.mit.edu? [EMAIL PROTECTED], I believe. -- Aaron M. Ucko, KB1CJC (amu at alum.mit.edu, ucko at debian.org) Finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] (NOT a valid e-mail address) for more info. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: bad mirror list in 3.1r3 netinst
On Sat, Nov 04, 2006 at 03:27:49PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > > However, the install quickly falls on its face again when it > > configures > > debsig-verify and all remaining debs fail to install. Missing > > override? > > It seems they were missing yes, that has been fixed too. Who is a good contact for debian.csail.mit.edu? It is still out of date (not using overrides), causing new sarge installs fail with the debsig-verify problem. -- dann frazier -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: bad mirror list in 3.1r3 netinst
On Sun, Nov 05, 2006 at 10:30:51PM -0700, dann frazier wrote: > > That was quick, thanks Kurt! > Now, who can we poke about updating the installer images? I think we need to wait for sarge r5, there aren't any plans to make any for sarge r4. Afaik, r5 is planned for in about 2 months. Kurt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: bad mirror list in 3.1r3 netinst
On Sat, Nov 04, 2006 at 03:27:49PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > On Fri, Nov 03, 2006 at 05:11:33PM -0700, dann frazier wrote: > > I tried an install with the 3.1r3 netinst ISO, and noticed that it > > appears to have reverted to the debian.org mirror list. > > > > It looks like it is no longer using a pure64 version of base-config. > > I merged the diff between base-config 2.53.10 and > > 2.53.10-0.0.0.1.pure64 onto 2.53.10.2 (patch below), and it fixed this > > problem. > > > > Patch is here: > > http://dannf.org/base-config-pure64-3.1r3.patch > > Uploaded to the archive and pushed to stable. > > > However, the install quickly falls on its face again when it configures > > debsig-verify and all remaining debs fail to install. Missing > > override? > > It seems they were missing yes, that has been fixed too. That was quick, thanks Kurt! Now, who can we poke about updating the installer images? -- dann frazier -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: bad mirror list in 3.1r3 netinst
On Fri, Nov 03, 2006 at 05:11:33PM -0700, dann frazier wrote: > I tried an install with the 3.1r3 netinst ISO, and noticed that it > appears to have reverted to the debian.org mirror list. > > It looks like it is no longer using a pure64 version of base-config. > I merged the diff between base-config 2.53.10 and > 2.53.10-0.0.0.1.pure64 onto 2.53.10.2 (patch below), and it fixed this > problem. > > Patch is here: > http://dannf.org/base-config-pure64-3.1r3.patch Uploaded to the archive and pushed to stable. > However, the install quickly falls on its face again when it configures > debsig-verify and all remaining debs fail to install. Missing > override? It seems they were missing yes, that has been fixed too. Kurt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
bad mirror list in 3.1r3 netinst
I tried an install with the 3.1r3 netinst ISO, and noticed that it appears to have reverted to the debian.org mirror list. It looks like it is no longer using a pure64 version of base-config. I merged the diff between base-config 2.53.10 and 2.53.10-0.0.0.1.pure64 onto 2.53.10.2 (patch below), and it fixed this problem. Patch is here: http://dannf.org/base-config-pure64-3.1r3.patch However, the install quickly falls on its face again when it configures debsig-verify and all remaining debs fail to install. Missing override? Let me know if there's anything I can do to help fix this stuff up. -- dann frazier -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
