Re: [BusyBox] BusyBox 0.52 wget broken
Erik Andersen wrote: On Mon Jul 23, 2001 at 10:13:23PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote: Erik Andersen wrote: On Thu Jul 19, 2001 at 11:49:19AM -0600, Matt Kraai wrote: Howdy, As noted by Per Wigren [EMAIL PROTECTED], BusyBox 0.52 contains a broken wget. This will prevent debootstrap's http method from working. It has since been fixed in CVS, but a new version of the boot-floppies should not be built until a new version containing this fix is uploaded. I was planning on getting a new busybox release out the door last night. But then I got tired and fell asleep. Hopefully today... Any news on that issue? Your mail is from July 19th and it's now July 23rd (or something like that). We're still struggling with this. For mipsel I've patched the wget.c file and it works now, but this should be released somehow... On July 20th, Matt Kraai reported that the wget bug (while it does exist) does not afflict the boot floppies. So (since I am on vacation at the moment) I felt I was able to ignore the problem with a clear conscience and so I have been enjoying my vacation. Your email seems to implay that Matt was not correct in his assessment. Is this indeed preventing net installs, or merely preventing you from using wget at the command line? If it is the former, I'll get a new package uploaded tomorrow (Tuesday). If this bug is merely preventing wget from working at the command line, then I'll get a new package put together on Saturday, when I get back from my vacation in Yellowstone. With the bug, debootstrap ends on mipsel with strange errors and wget fails with a segmentation fault. After applying the patch from cvs and rebuilding busybox, rebuilding the initrd, rebuilding the kernel image, rebooting, wget and debootstrap work satisfying. So yes, I believe that Matt was wrong. Regards, Joey -- In the beginning was the word, and the word was content-type: text/plain -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cvs commit to boot-floppies/debian by joey
Repository: boot-floppies/debian who:joey time: Tue Jul 24 01:28:38 PDT 2001 Log Message: Added missing changelog entry for jaqque Files: changed:changelog -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Problems with building the Alpha-bootdisks
Thimo Neubauer wrote: Hi, I'm trying to build the Alpha-bootdisks, because up to now I haven't heard of anyone doing this and I want the release to happen ;-) Anyway, I'm getting an error when rootdisk.sh tries to download the needed packages. After setting the debug-variable I found an apt-error: (I wrapped the apt-commandline) -- snip -- Sorry, but the following packages have unmet dependencies: sysvinit: Depends: e2fsprogs (= 1.15-1) but it is not going to be installed E: Sorry, broken packages ... -- snip -- Note that I already added sysvinit to the list of needed packages, because before I got the error that modutils needs sysvinit... Maybe this is the error? But if it is, the problem somehow stays the same... I could of course download the packages manually but do not know if this will make things even worse... Remember that this is the first time I try to build the boot-disks :) From a first glance it looks like a dependency problem: sysvinit: Depends e2fsprogs (= 1.15-1) e2fsprogs: version 1.22-1 is available, but: e2fsprogs-bf version 1.22-1 will be installed, so the dependency is not fulfilled. I guess that sysvinit should have a dependency like e2fsprogs (= 1.15-1) | e2fsprogs-bf (= 1.15-1) Regards, Joey -- In the beginning was the word, and the word was content-type: text/plain -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Problems with building the Alpha-bootdisks
On Tue, Jul 24, 2001 at 10:38:30AM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote: From a first glance it looks like a dependency problem: sysvinit: Depends e2fsprogs (= 1.15-1) e2fsprogs: version 1.22-1 is available, but: e2fsprogs-bf version 1.22-1 will be installed, so the dependency is not fulfilled. I guess that sysvinit should have a dependency like e2fsprogs (= 1.15-1) | e2fsprogs-bf (= 1.15-1) Well, I thought about that as well, but if sysvinit had these dependencies a user and/or apt could get the idea that installing e2fsprogs-bf seems like a good idea which it is not (out of the description of e2fsprogs-bf): | Don't attempt to install this package, it has no support for a | couple of features you surely want. Anyway it should refuse to | install. This could give raise to a bunch of bad bug reports... Anyway, it seems that the downloading of the packages needed for the boot-floppies seems to be broken if there is no way of getting apt to download package-files without checking. CU Thimo -- Thimo Neubauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Debian GNU/Linux 3.0 semi-frozen! See http://www.debian.org/ for details PGP signature
Re: Problems with building the Alpha-bootdisks
On Tue, Jul 24, 2001 at 10:50:42AM +0200, Thimo Neubauer wrote: e2fsprogs (= 1.15-1) | e2fsprogs-bf (= 1.15-1) not needed Well, I thought about that as well, but if sysvinit had these dependencies a user and/or apt could get the idea that installing e2fsprogs-bf seems like a good idea which it is not (out of the description of e2fsprogs-bf): | Don't attempt to install this package, it has no support for a | couple of features you surely want. Anyway it should refuse to | install. This could give raise to a bunch of bad bug reports... Anyway, it seems that the downloading of the packages needed for the boot-floppies seems to be broken if there is no way of getting apt to download package-files without checking. i never had any trouble with this, i used a woody chroot which is quite normal it has sysvinit and regular e2fsprogs (not -bf) installed. apt seems to have no trouble with this inside of boot-floppies build. are you sure your not trying to build on potato? or a very outdated testing/unstable? -- Ethan Benson http://www.alaska.net/~erbenson/ PGP signature
Re: Bug#105364: installer allows user to insert underscores in the hostname
Matt Kraai [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, Jul 23, 2001 at 12:54:31PM +0200, Kjetil Torgrim Homme wrote: It's very early, yet. But a few things are reasonably clear. They'll use Unicode, they just haven't decided on the encoding. That is, all characters which aren't US-ASCII will probably be added to the list of allowed characters. I don't think so. According to [1], Appendix F, there are quite a few prohibited non-ASCII code points. 1. http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idn-nameprep-04.txt You are right. (btw, it's now replaced by -05) There are also some normalization rules. I'm not sure if the normalizations should be performed in dbootstrap or in some lower layer, however. Ugh. Do we really want to go there? The limit of 63 octets per name component probably won't change, but notice that the number of characters will be less, depending on the encoding. One thing: It would be good to disallow the use of ASCII Compatible Encoding-prefixes. They look like xx--, where x is an arbitrary letter. I've never seen these before, this being my first foray into internationalization. I'll keep this in mind, however. Will the input be encoded in UTF-8? No, that will break too many protocols. That's the reason for ASCII Compatible Encoding, using only characters a-z0-9/-. Look at some of the examples (/^Exampl) in http://www.i-d-n.net/draft/draft-ietf-idn-amc-ace-w-00.txt Notice that UTF8 is inefficient for Hangeul and other scripts, even if it uses the full 8 bits instead of 5. (Personally, I hope something like http://www.i-d-n.net/draft/draft-ietf-idn-udns-02.txt passes. I'm not too optimistic, this reminds me of all the warts of MIME we probably never will be rid of.) Kjetil T. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Problems with building the Alpha-bootdisks
On Tue, Jul 24, 2001 at 03:55:04AM -0800, Ethan Benson wrote: i never had any trouble with this, i used a woody chroot which is quite normal it has sysvinit and regular e2fsprogs (not -bf) installed. apt seems to have no trouble with this inside of boot-floppies build. are you sure your not trying to build on potato? or a very outdated testing/unstable? Yes, I'm running an up-to-date testing. The version of the system building the boot-floppies has no influence on the problem, because the apt-process showing the error uses his own boot-floppies/sources.list. Additionally, the problem only happens if you start with an empty download-directory, because rootdisk.sh only tells apt to download the packages not yet downloaded. This also means that I could fix the problem by downloading the packages manually, but where is the point having the download-stuff if it does not work without manual interaction? CU Thimo -- Thimo Neubauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Debian GNU/Linux 3.0 semi-frozen! See http://www.debian.org/ for details PGP signature
Re: Problems with building the Alpha-bootdisks
Hi, the biggest problems with the alpha bootfloppies is the size of some files. I think libary-reduction on alpha ist really a mess. The size of root.bin is around 1,7 MB (it was 1,70 MB on A DS20, 1,72 MB on a XP-1000). This will not fit on a normal 1,44 floppy. For the builds I used chroot sid, because base is not freeze yet and I used the e2fsprogs-bs, because with the normal e2fsprogs the site of root.bin was bigger. -- Henning Heinold -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Successful first-stage bootstrap for mipsel
On Tue, Jul 24, 2001 at 01:56:48PM +0200, Florian Lohoff wrote: On Tue, Jul 24, 2001 at 08:30:39AM +0200, Karsten Merker wrote: Hallo everybody, I have successfully done a first-stage bootstrap (until the reboot after complete installation of the base system) on a DECstation (mipsel) with sid this night. I will test the rest when I am back from work this evening. We needed some patches to - busybox (requires CVS version) - debootstrap - bootfloppies and there are still several rough edges and oddities, but it has worked in principle. Currently both bootstrapping and booting the installed system has to be done via network, but that is not unusual for this kind of machine. For the decstation set of boot-floppies one could include delo - There are some unresolved licensing issues with it as i used a BSD header and i dont seem to find time to solve this. Flo -- Hm yeah in the debootstrap-scripts delo is mentioned to bee install, but the installer didn't find the package. Is delo now as package in the mipsel? -- Henning Heinold -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Problems with building the Alpha-bootdisks
On Tue, Jul 24, 2001 at 02:27:38PM +0200, Thimo Neubauer wrote:
Yes, I'm running an up-to-date testing. The version of the system
building the boot-floppies has no influence on the problem, because
the apt-process showing the error uses his own
boot-floppies/sources.list. Additionally, the problem only happens if
no the host system does have a minimal inpact on how apt behaves, you
cannot build woody boot-floppies on potato for example, and not
because of libc issues.
you start with an empty download-directory, because rootdisk.sh only
tells apt to download the packages not yet downloaded. This also means
that I could fix the problem by downloading the packages manually, but
where is the point having the download-stuff if it does not work
without manual interaction?
oh i see, i have only done one boot-floppies build with an empty cache
directory.
i would say the best solution is stop using apt-get install
--download-only -blah -blah -blah to download packages. in horribly
inefficient anyway since it ends up downloading lots of unused
packages simply to satisfy dependencies that are never needed.
i would replace the apt-get install commands with something like
(example only):
fake-get()
{
local MIRROR=$(grep '^deb ' sources.list | awk '{print $2}')
for i in $@ ; do
local PACKAGE=$(apt-cache show $i | grep ^File | awk '{print $2}')
(cd $archive/cache/archives wget -q $MIRROR/$PACKAGE)
done
}
that will only work with a one line sources.list, but i fail to see
the point of having both unstable and testing in there anyway.
your only other option perhaps is fixing --force-yes (which is
currently broken), but that may not solve depends anyway.
--
Ethan Benson
http://www.alaska.net/~erbenson/
PGP signature
Re: Successful first-stage bootstrap for mipsel
On Tue, Jul 24, 2001 at 02:36:49PM +0200, H.Heinold wrote: Hm yeah in the debootstrap-scripts delo is mentioned to bee install, but the installer didn't find the package. Is delo now as package in the mipsel? Not yet Flo -- Florian Lohoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] +49-5201-669912 Why is it called common sense when nobody seems to have any? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#105364: installer allows user to insert underscores in the hostname
On Tue, Jul 24, 2001 at 01:57:51PM +0200, Kjetil Torgrim Homme wrote: Matt Kraai [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Will the input be encoded in UTF-8? No, that will break too many protocols. That's the reason for ASCII Compatible Encoding, using only characters a-z0-9/-. Look at some of the examples (/^Exampl) in http://www.i-d-n.net/draft/draft-ietf-idn-amc-ace-w-00.txt Notice that UTF8 is inefficient for Hangeul and other scripts, even if it uses the full 8 bits instead of 5. (Personally, I hope something like http://www.i-d-n.net/draft/draft-ietf-idn-udns-02.txt passes. I'm not too optimistic, this reminds me of all the warts of MIME we probably never will be rid of.) In order to implement this, I really need to know the answers to the following questions: * What encoding is used for the host name input by the user? * What host name validation should be performed by dbootstrap? * What encoding should be used for writing the host name? The kernel treats the host name as any other character string, and so doesn't appear to care about the encoding. I haven't been able to find the libc source which deals with internationalized host names, so I don't know what format it expects things in. Matt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#105364: installer allows user to insert underscores in the hostname
Matt Kraai [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In order to implement this, I really need to know the answers to the following questions: * What encoding is used for the host name input by the user? * What host name validation should be performed by dbootstrap? * What encoding should be used for writing the host name? The kernel treats the host name as any other character string, and so doesn't appear to care about the encoding. I haven't been able to find the libc source which deals with internationalized host names, so I don't know what format it expects things in. IMHO, we should only enforce what has been standardised. * Only allow components matching the simple grammar in RFC 1034. (section 3.5) * Each name component is max 63 octets. * Total hostname length is max 255 octets. * No component can start with letterletterhyphenhyphen (not really in the standards, but pertinent anyway) When the process moves out of the draft process, implement whatever the RFC says. Kjetil T. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#105364: installer allows user to insert underscores in the hostname
On Tue, Jul 24, 2001 at 05:43:30PM +0200, Kjetil Torgrim Homme wrote: Matt Kraai [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In order to implement this, I really need to know the answers to the following questions: * What encoding is used for the host name input by the user? * What host name validation should be performed by dbootstrap? * What encoding should be used for writing the host name? The kernel treats the host name as any other character string, and so doesn't appear to care about the encoding. I haven't been able to find the libc source which deals with internationalized host names, so I don't know what format it expects things in. IMHO, we should only enforce what has been standardised. * Only allow components matching the simple grammar in RFC 1034. (section 3.5) * Each name component is max 63 octets. * Total hostname length is max 255 octets. * No component can start with letterletterhyphenhyphen (not really in the standards, but pertinent anyway) I don't have a problem with only implementing existing standards. At the moment, I believe that RFC 1034 compliance is enforced. I've since discovered RFC 1123, which changes a few of the requirements, so I'll make one more round of updates. Given the uncertainty regarding internationalized host names, and the fact that the boot-floppies are soon to be retired, I'm punting on this feature. Matt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cvs commit to boot-floppies/debian by kraai
Repository: boot-floppies/debian who:kraai time: Tue Jul 24 09:39:39 PDT 2001 Log Message: check host name for RFC 1123 compliance Files: changed:changelog -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cvs commit to boot-floppies/utilities/dbootstrap by kraai
Repository: boot-floppies/utilities/dbootstrap who:kraai time: Tue Jul 24 09:39:40 PDT 2001 Log Message: check host name for RFC 1123 compliance Files: changed:netconfig.c -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#106238: Fw: Grafik card problem of IMPORTANT
On Tue, 24 Jul 2001 at 18:51:54 +0200, Stefan Michlits wrote: From: Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] reassign 106238 boot-floppies thanks On Mon, 23 Jul 2001 at 00:14:04 +0200, Stefan Michlits wrote: Package: Boot problem Now I do not have before a few days a new diagram card gotten (3d Prophet 2 4500) bootet Debian 2,2 no more. Even if I it to install again do not want bootet it. The display switches off and the PC hangs itself up. With alten(ELSA the Victory Erazor / lt) it goes? Can help their me please? I'll reassign this to the boot-floppies as a first guess (could be kernel). Anyone? The Kernel Version is: 2.2.17 Please Help me. ;) I just deal with bugs against unknown packages, and can't help you any more than that. I'm cc'ing this information back to the bug report, where perhaps someone can. -- Colin Watson [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bootdisks for Dell PowerEdge 2500 and 2550
On Mon, Jul 23, 2001 at 11:02:34AM -0400, Russell Hires wrote: On the other hand, there is an option when doing the install to add third party kernel modules, isn't there? That won't help for booting... Unless you use initrd. Ingemar, why don't you make a custom patched kernel and copy the bzImage to the floppy as linux and try it again? Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cvs commit to boot-floppies/documentation by kraai
Repository: boot-floppies/documentation who:kraai time: Tue Jul 24 14:48:55 PDT 2001 Log Message: update version number to 3.0 Files: changed:index.en.html.m4 index.ja.html.m4 index.pl.html.m4 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ash/modconf problem in 3.0.8 i386 boot-floppies
Howdy, The version of ash included on the 3.0.8 i386 boot-floppies appears to contain a quoting bug which prevents modconf from working. Does anyone know which version was used in building the floppies so that I can file a bug? Matt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#106457: Can't install `testing'
On Tue, Jul 24, 2001 at 10:24:04AM -0700, George Pongas wrote: Alt-F4 shows: ... Freeing unused kernel memory: 152k freed Segmentation fault Segmentation fault wget is segfaulting, known problem with busybox wget. -- Ethan Benson http://www.alaska.net/~erbenson/ PGP signature
Bug#106238: Fw: Grafik card problem of IMPORTANT
Earlier I wrote: Are you installing Debian, or is this a problem booting an already installed system? How far does it get in the boot sequence between the display turns off? On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 12:39:34AM +0200, Stefan Michlits wrote: Both!! After the CD-Rom Check turn off the display an the pc hang off. I can see it die Error, because the display turn off. :-( I do not point simply which it be could. With the old card it goes without problems. Given that it happens on an installed system, this doesn't sound like a boot-floppies problem to me. I'm not really sure where it should be assigned, though. Could you please send us the last message printed to the screen? Matt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
