Bug#597282: installation-reports: debian lenny net-installer
Quoting Torsten Berger (tober...@t-online.de): yes, I've the same problem! :-( Now the installer don't search on /dev/hdx, instead on on /dev/sdbx and NOT on /dev/sda1. It's logical that search happens on /dev/hdxN. This is how such device names are like, now. From the logs you provided, the installer found two stoirage devices: hda : SanDisk SDCFX3-004G, CFA DISK drive hdc: ST340014A, ATA DISK drive Then iso-scan *doesn't* search for the ISO image on hda but only on hdc: Sep 17 20:14:44 iso-scan: First pass: Look for ISOs near top-level of each filesystem. Sep 17 20:14:44 iso-scan: Waiting for /dev/hdc1 to possibly get ready.. Sep 17 20:14:48 iso-scan: Mounted /dev/hdc2 for first pass Sep 17 20:14:48 kernel: [ 22.952265] EXT2-fs warning (device hdc2): ext2_fill_super: mounting ext3 filesystem as ext2 Sep 17 20:14:48 iso-scan: Failed mounting /dev/hdc2 etc. On which of the two partitions of your 4G card did you put the ISO image? signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#514654: debian-cd: [squeeze] include kbd on first CD rather than console-tools
Quoting Steve McIntyre (st...@einval.com): /* Used for Lenny and earlier */ console-data console-common console-tools console-cyrillic console-terminus /* Used for Squeeze and onwards */ console-setup pcmciautils ... What *should* be there now, exactly? I've no idea what's needed in terms of the fonts, console-* and kbd-* :-( Frankly speaking, console management is a big mess, imho, with nearly nobody caring enough..:-) console-cyrillic and console-terminus can be dropped. They used to be installed for several languages (Cyrillic ones and Eastern european ones) but we use console-setup now. The same stands for console-data which we kept for Western European languages...until we dropped it too. console-common is superseded by kbd so you can drop it too. One of both is Recommended by console-setup. So, indeed, the comments are right: drop everything mentioned for lenny and earlier and keep what's mentioned for squeeze but add kbd to this. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: problem installing debian-506-powerpc
Ah, there was no problem with the installer neither boot/kernel parameters. The reason is unsufficient memory for the ramdisk. After cleanup: [enter OF prompt] dev nvram wipe-nvram installer started happily. Thanks for the effort, regards Zsombor On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 6:34 PM, Lennart Sorensen lsore...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca wrote: On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 06:04:27PM +0200, Zsombor wrote: It is happenning during the install, just after I boot from CD and choosing 'install64' (and any *64) . Tried with all imaginable boot parameters this problem still persists. But I also hate yaboot so I give a chance with grub2 squeeze. Thank you for the advise! Hmm, at least the daily build installer I used about 2 months ago booted. I had to do 'install64 video=ofonly'. Without the ofonly option it won't boot for me. yaboot on the install CD is fine, but yaboot for disk access is hopeless (The debian package hasn't been updated in years, and the fixed version that would work for these machines isn't in Debian as a result). Given yaboot doesn't do software raid, modern linux filesystems or anything else, grub2 is highly preferable even if it takes some manual work to install. -- Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/aanlktint0knnltf+vank24t8bqd6h0�ljd=mxqc...@mail.gmail.com
Re: kFreeBSD version of the Debian Installation Guide
Christian PERRIER, le Mon 20 Sep 2010 06:42:46 +0200, a écrit : Quoting Holger Wansing (li...@wansing-online.de): Samuel Thibault sthiba...@debian.org wrote: Well, to keep the manual readable we should probably not replace Debian with debian; as it is now. Maybe rename the existing `debian' entity into something else like debiangnu, and then introduce debian; expanding to Debian? Yes, I would recommend this solution. Samuel, can you take care of it? Sure. Samuel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100920080101.gf5...@const.famille.thibault.fr
is lilo ever installed by default anymore?
Hi all, I'm working on cleaning up the release notes for the squeeze release, and in the section on post-upgrade lilo handling, we have this note, which is carried over from lenny (where it referred to etch): If you are using lilo as your bootloader (it is the default bootloader for some installations of lenny) it is strongly recommended that you rerun lilo after the upgrade. Can anyone confirm that it's actually the case in lenny that lilo is used by default is some situations? I'm not sure where in d-i to look for this. Thanks, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#597498: keyboard-configuration: HAL is still mentioned in comments of `/etc/default/keyboard`.
Subject: keyboard-configuration: HAL is still mentioned in comments of `/etc/default/keyboard`. Package: keyboard-configuration Version: 1.56 Severity: normal *** Please type your report below this line *** Dear Debian folks, in contrary to what is said for 1.56 in `changelog.Debian.gz` [1] […] [ Anton Zinoviev] […] * Do not mention HAL in the comment of /etc/default/keyboard. Suggest a reboot instead. I still have the following comments in my `/etc/default/keyboard` after the upgrade. # If you change any of the following variables and HAL and X are # configured to use this file, then the changes will become visible to # X only if HAL is restarted. In Debian you need to run # /etc/init.d/hal restart Did I do something wrong or did this change slip through somehow. Thanks, Paul [1] http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/c/console-setup/console-setup_1.56/changelog#versionversion1.56 -- System Information: Debian Release: squeeze/sid APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (1, 'experimental') Architecture: i386 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-5-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=de_DE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Versions of packages keyboard-configuration depends on: ii debconf [debconf-2.0] 1.5.35 Debian configuration management sy keyboard-configuration recommends no packages. keyboard-configuration suggests no packages. -- debconf information excluded signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#597510: /etc/init.d/udhcpd force-reload uses wrong order: start+stop instead of stop+start
Package: udhcpd Version: 1:1.17.1-4 Severity: normal /etc/init.d/udhcpd force-reload emulates a reload by using start and stop, but calls them in the wrong order: sascha.si...@flatty:~$ sudo /etc/init.d/udhcpd force-reload Starting very small Busybox based DHCP server: /usr/sbin/udhcpd already running. udhcpd. Stopping very small Busybox based DHCP server: Stopped /usr/sbin/udhcpd (pid 9295). udhcpd. sascha.si...@flatty:~$ -- System Information: Debian Release: squeeze/sid APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing') Architecture: armel (armv5tel) Kernel: Linux 2.6.34-rc7-flatty-ocf-2-00126-g835446b Locale: LANG=en_US, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Versions of packages udhcpd depends on: ii busybox 1:1.17.1-4 Tiny utilities for small and embed udhcpd recommends no packages. udhcpd suggests no packages. -- Configuration Files: /etc/default/udhcpd changed [not included] /etc/udhcpd.conf changed [not included] -- no debconf information -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100920100403.18564.76536.report...@flatty.sascha.silbe.org
Bug#597282: installation-reports: debian lenny net-installer
Hallo Christian, Am 20.09.2010 06:56, schrieb Christian PERRIER: From the logs you provided, the installer found two stoirage devices: yes, of corse. The installer don't work too without /dev/hdc! Then iso-scan *doesn't* search for the ISO image on hda but only on hdc: Why??? And why works the installer from the smaller 2GB CF card??? On which of the two partitions of your 4G card did you put the ISO image? The Installer is located on /dev/hda1. I wrote it in the first part of my bugreport. For example: It works fine with the smaller 2GB CF card. Why not with the larger 4GB Card? I dont know why. Thanks and bye Torsten. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c9746fc.2090...@tb.all
Bug#597087: debian-installer: Swap space is too big when created by the guided partitioner
Hi! On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 2:54 PM, Christian PERRIER bubu...@debian.org wrote: Indeed, 3 times the memory size seems too big, particularly with large amounts of RAM (large varies over time!). I was reading the recipes in partman-auto and while it seems that it's not possible with the infrastructure that we have now, something like an inverse exponential function would fit, I think. For example, with a small amount of RAM a swap space of 300% the RAM size would be created. Then the higher the RAM size available, the smaller the swap space created. On a system with 8GB, instead creating a swap space of 24GB (300%), we could have 4GB only (50%, or even less). Just a suggestion (that needs to be thought better). Best regards, Nelson -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/aanlktimyq7x6s-s7uwyalygi3ogepapbxeptihc+z...@mail.gmail.com
Bug#597087: debian-installer: Swap space is too big when created by the guided partitioner
Nelson A. de Oliveira nao...@debian.org writes: On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 2:54 PM, Christian PERRIER bubu...@debian.org wrote: Indeed, 3 times the memory size seems too big, particularly with large amounts of RAM (large varies over time!). I was reading the recipes in partman-auto and while it seems that it's not possible with the infrastructure that we have now, something like an inverse exponential function would fit, I think. For example, with a small amount of RAM a swap space of 300% the RAM size would be created. Then the higher the RAM size available, the smaller the swap space created. On a system with 8GB, instead creating a swap space of 24GB (300%), we could have 4GB only (50%, or even less). Just a suggestion (that needs to be thought better). Suspend to disk can easily require 100% swap space (assuming you run some big application in your big memory). The main problem is that it isn't easy to modify the automatic swap allocation. Nowadays I'd recommend going with LVM and leaving some space unused for future allocation (which again require manual partitioning). Regarding the LVM recipes in general, they suck up all available space, negating a strong point of LVM: flexible future allocation. (In principle one could shrink some filesystems and reallocate space, but that's often impractical even when possible.) Just some thoughts. -- Regards, Feri. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87ocbs1piu@tac.ki.iif.hu
Bug#597087: debian-installer: Swap space is too big when created by the guided partitioner
On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 10:16:42AM -0300, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote: I was reading the recipes in partman-auto and while it seems that it's not possible with the infrastructure that we have now, something like an inverse exponential function would fit, I think. For example, with a small amount of RAM a swap space of 300% the RAM size would be created. Then the higher the RAM size available, the smaller the swap space created. On a system with 8GB, instead creating a swap space of 24GB (300%), we could have 4GB only (50%, or even less). Just a suggestion (that needs to be thought better). Doesn't suspend require swap = ram? Not everyone needs that, but some people do. -- Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100920141952.gl8...@caffeine.csclub.uwaterloo.ca
Bug#597498: marked as done (keyboard-configuration: HAL is still mentioned in comments of `/etc/default/keyboard`.)
Your message dated Mon, 20 Sep 2010 16:28:57 +0200 with message-id 1284992937.3914.34.ca...@mattotaupa and subject line Re: Bug#597498: keyboard-configuration: HAL is still mentioned in comments of `/etc/default/keyboard`. has caused the Debian Bug report #597498, regarding keyboard-configuration: HAL is still mentioned in comments of `/etc/default/keyboard`. 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.) -- 597498: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=597498 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- Subject: keyboard-configuration: HAL is still mentioned in comments of `/etc/default/keyboard`. Package: keyboard-configuration Version: 1.56 Severity: normal *** Please type your report below this line *** Dear Debian folks, in contrary to what is said for 1.56 in `changelog.Debian.gz` [1] […] [ Anton Zinoviev] […] * Do not mention HAL in the comment of /etc/default/keyboard. Suggest a reboot instead. I still have the following comments in my `/etc/default/keyboard` after the upgrade. # If you change any of the following variables and HAL and X are # configured to use this file, then the changes will become visible to # X only if HAL is restarted. In Debian you need to run # /etc/init.d/hal restart Did I do something wrong or did this change slip through somehow. Thanks, Paul [1] http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/c/console-setup/console-setup_1.56/changelog#versionversion1.56 -- System Information: Debian Release: squeeze/sid APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (1, 'experimental') Architecture: i386 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-5-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=de_DE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Versions of packages keyboard-configuration depends on: ii debconf [debconf-2.0] 1.5.35 Debian configuration management sy keyboard-configuration recommends no packages. keyboard-configuration suggests no packages. -- debconf information excluded signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- Am Montag, den 20.09.2010, 17:01 +0300 schrieb Anton Zinoviev: On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 11:10:25AM +0200, Paul Menzel wrote: in contrary to what is said for 1.56 in `changelog.Debian.gz` [1] * Do not mention HAL in the comment of /etc/default/keyboard. Suggest a reboot instead. I still have the following comments in my `/etc/default/keyboard` after the upgrade. # If you change any of the following variables and HAL and X are # configured to use this file, then the changes will become visible to # X only if HAL is restarted. In Debian you need to run # /etc/init.d/hal restart Did I do something wrong or did this change slip through somehow. The comments in the existing configuration files will be leaved unchanged. The change affects only people who install keyboard-configuration for first time. Version 1.56 is intedted to be permited to enter 'testing' so no soffisticated editing of the configuration files is desirable. Thank you for the explanation. I thought that these files are replaced by the newer ones, when they have not been modified. You can close my report in your next reply. Thanks, Paul signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ---End Message---
Bug#597498: keyboard-configuration: HAL is still mentioned in comments of `/etc/default/keyboard`.
On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 11:10:25AM +0200, Paul Menzel wrote: in contrary to what is said for 1.56 in `changelog.Debian.gz` [1] * Do not mention HAL in the comment of /etc/default/keyboard. Suggest a reboot instead. I still have the following comments in my `/etc/default/keyboard` after the upgrade. # If you change any of the following variables and HAL and X are # configured to use this file, then the changes will become visible to # X only if HAL is restarted. In Debian you need to run # /etc/init.d/hal restart Did I do something wrong or did this change slip through somehow. The comments in the existing configuration files will be leaved unchanged. The change affects only people who install keyboard-configuration for first time. Version 1.56 is intedted to be permited to enter 'testing' so no soffisticated editing of the configuration files is desirable. Anton Zinoviev -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100920140104.ga2...@debian.lan
Bug#597282: installation-reports: debian lenny net-installer
On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 01:35:24PM +0200, Torsten Berger wrote: Am 20.09.2010 06:56, schrieb Christian PERRIER: From the logs you provided, the installer found two stoirage devices: yes, of corse. The installer don't work too without /dev/hdc! Then iso-scan *doesn't* search for the ISO image on hda but only on hdc: Why??? And why works the installer from the smaller 2GB CF card??? On which of the two partitions of your 4G card did you put the ISO image? The Installer is located on /dev/hda1. I wrote it in the first part of my bugreport. For example: It works fine with the smaller 2GB CF card. Why not with the larger 4GB Card? I dont know why. Are you actually using compact flash cards? 2GB and 4GB compact flash should behave the same, although the 4GB would need fat32 rather than fat16 (if using fat that is). For SD cards (in case that's what you actually meant), anything over 2GB is SDHC (except a few old 4GB SD cards that are not compliant with the SD standard and hence are not SD cards). Many older devices, and even some newer ones don't support SDHC at all and as a result only work with 2GB or smaller SD cards. -- Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100920143055.gm8...@caffeine.csclub.uwaterloo.ca
Re: is lilo ever installed by default anymore?
Quoting Steve Langasek (vor...@debian.org): Hi all, I'm working on cleaning up the release notes for the squeeze release, and in the section on post-upgrade lilo handling, we have this note, which is carried over from lenny (where it referred to etch): If you are using lilo as your bootloader (it is the default bootloader for some installations of lenny) it is strongly recommended that you rerun lilo after the upgrade. Can anyone confirm that it's actually the case in lenny that lilo is used by default is some situations? I'm not sure where in d-i to look for this. Looking around in D-I SVN, I see no code under packages/ that says don't install grub-installer and use lilo-installer instead. So, only the packages' priorities and the Menu-Item number can give precedence of one over the other Packages are Priority: standard and grub-installer has a lower menu entry number. So, in short, I don't see any default install path where users would end up with lilo-installer being executed in place of grub-installer. The only path seems to be an expert install and explicitly choosing to install LILO instead of GRUB. So, I would say that LILO is no longer the default installer for some installations of lenny. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#597282: installation-reports: debian lenny net-installer
(no need to CC me to answers as I read them through the -boot mailing list) Quoting Torsten Berger (tober...@t-online.de): Hallo Christian, Am 20.09.2010 06:56, schrieb Christian PERRIER: From the logs you provided, the installer found two stoirage devices: yes, of corse. The installer don't work too without /dev/hdc! Then iso-scan *doesn't* search for the ISO image on hda but only on hdc: Why??? And why works the installer from the smaller 2GB CF card??? On which of the two partitions of your 4G card did you put the ISO image? The Installer is located on /dev/hda1. I wrote it in the first part of my bugreport. For example: It works fine with the smaller 2GB CF card. Why not with the larger 4GB Card? I dont know why. Could you post the installer log with the working 2GB card? At least down (and including) the iso-scan part up to the point where the ISO image is found? signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#597475: debian-installer: Screen flashes on and off after fresh installation of squeeze.
reassign 597475 xserver-xorg-core severity 597475 important thanks Quoting Ryan David Larrowe (rlarr...@gmail.com): Package: debian-installer Severity: critical Justification: breaks the whole system After installing debian squeeze when starting the gui the monitor turns on and off with white streaks when it is on. -- System Information: I am using Debian Squeeze released on 7-15-10 for X86. I have an ATI Radeon HD 3650 AGP 8X with 512MB RAM. This bug more belongs to the X server than the installer itself. Hence reassigning so that the concerned maintainers can (hopefully...they're overloaded) deal with it. Please provide the content of /var/log/Xorg.0.log. I'm unsure whether that'll be enough and Xorg maintainers may need you to provide more information... signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Processed: Re: Bug#597475: debian-installer: Screen flashes on and off after fresh installation of squeeze.
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: reassign 597475 xserver-xorg-core Bug #597475 [debian-installer] debian-installer: Screen flashes on and off after fresh installation of squeeze. Bug reassigned from package 'debian-installer' to 'xserver-xorg-core'. severity 597475 important Bug #597475 [xserver-xorg-core] debian-installer: Screen flashes on and off after fresh installation of squeeze. Severity set to 'important' from 'critical' thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 597475: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=597475 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/handler.s.c.128500664523162.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Bug#597553: cdrom-detect: Need a simple retry or delay to mount USB CD-ROMs
Package: cdrom-detect Version: 1.33 I'm doing some testing on the squeeze debian-installer package from svn. In the Lenny release, when installing from a USB CD-ROM it sometimes took longer to load the modules, spin up the drive and get a response before the mount command would fail. This meant that in some cases it was necessary to hit Enter to retry the mount as prompted by the installer. In Squeeze, the installer no longer allows for a simple retry and it is now necessary to go through a three step 'Load CD-ROM drivers from removable media' etc. just to simply retry the CD-ROM mount. Given that this has been an issue for two releases, would it be possible to just try to mount twice for each device instead of once. Or possibly have a slight pause between running list-devices (which appears to trigger the USB modules to load) and the subsequent mount attempt? I've got a repeatable scenario and am willing to test any changes. Tony -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c97acf2.6060...@awtrey.com
Bug#597553: cdrom-detect: Need a simple retry or delay to mount USB CD-ROMs
For what it's worth, doing the following made the issue go away for us: Index: packages/cdrom-detect/debian/cdrom-detect.postinst === --- packages/cdrom-detect/debian/cdrom-detect.postinst (revision 64821) +++ packages/cdrom-detect/debian/cdrom-detect.postinst (working copy) @@ -96,6 +96,7 @@ WRONG= devices=$(list-devices cd; list-devices maybe-usb-floppy) + sleep 2 for device in $devices; do if try_mount $device $CDFS; then break 2 I know, it's a total hack. Would it be better to put something in list-devices to wait until the devices become available? T -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c97b39a.9060...@awtrey.com
Bug#597553: cdrom-detect: Need a simple retry or delay to mount USB CD-ROMs
Quoting Anthony L. Awtrey (t...@awtrey.com): For what it's worth, doing the following made the issue go away for us: Index: packages/cdrom-detect/debian/cdrom-detect.postinst === --- packages/cdrom-detect/debian/cdrom-detect.postinst (revision 64821) +++ packages/cdrom-detect/debian/cdrom-detect.postinst (working copy) @@ -96,6 +96,7 @@ WRONG= devices=$(list-devices cd; list-devices maybe-usb-floppy) + sleep 2 for device in $devices; do if try_mount $device $CDFS; then break 2 I know, it's a total hack. Would it be better to put something in list-devices to wait until the devices become available? Assuming someone knows about The Right Way to know that devices are available, sure. Otherwise, I think that your hack is better than nothing. Others, objections? signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#597553: cdrom-detect: Need a simple retry or delay to mount USB CD-ROMs
http://devinte.com http://vallarta.devinte.com De: Anthony L. Awtrey t...@awtrey.com Para: sub...@bugs.debian.org Enviado: lun, septiembre 20, 2010 1:50:26 PM Asunto: Bug#597553: cdrom-detect: Need a simple retry or delay to mount USB CD-ROMs Package: cdrom-detect Version: 1.33 I'm doing some testing on the squeeze debian-installer package from svn. In the Lenny release, when installing from a USB CD-ROM it sometimes took longer to load the modules, spin up the drive and get a response before the mount command would fail. This meant that in some cases it was necessary to hit Enter to retry the mount as prompted by the installer. In Squeeze, the installer no longer allows for a simple retry and it is now necessary to go through a three step 'Load CD-ROM drivers from removable media' etc. just to simply retry the CD-ROM mount. Given that this has been an issue for two releases, would it be possible to just try to mount twice for each device instead of once. Or possibly have a slight pause between running list-devices (which appears to trigger the USB modules to load) and the subsequent mount attempt? I've got a repeatable scenario and am willing to test any changes. Tony -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c97acf2.6060...@awtrey.com
Bug#213834: anna 0.060
Hi all, i found this entry in anna's changelog (version 0.060), which may be relevant to this bug: - Stop hardcoding dependency on no longer existant libc-udeb, just use the libc6 dependency from substvars, and let libc6-udebs provide, plus libd-i's lack of version checking, do their thing. -- Melhores cumprimentos/Best regards, Miguel Figueiredo http://www.DebianPT.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c97cc55.6020...@debianpt.org
Processed: severity of 597461 is wishlist, severity of 597460 is wishlist
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
severity 597461 wishlist
Bug #597461 {Done: Joey Hess jo...@debian.org} [debootstrap] Please add
support for wheezy
Severity set to 'wishlist' from 'serious'
severity 597460 wishlist
Bug #597460 [cdebootstrap] Please add support for Wheezy
Severity set to 'wishlist' from 'serious'
thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
597460: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=597460
597461: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=597461
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/handler.s.c.12850175872258.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Bug#215473: marked as done (generated fstab does not take ide-scsi into account)
Your message dated Mon, 20 Sep 2010 22:21:13 +0100 with message-id 4c97d049.7010...@debianpt.org and subject line device name has caused the Debian Bug report #215473, regarding generated fstab does not take ide-scsi into account 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.) -- 215473: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=215473 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: installation-reports INSTALL REPORT Debian-installer-version : 1.10, Oct 8 2003 uname -a: Linux flit 2.4.22-1-386 #1 Fri Sep 5 20:56:48 EST 2003 i686 GNU/Linux Date installed: Oct 9 2003 Method: used http://gluck.debian.org/cdimage/testing/netinst/i386/sarge-i386-netinst.iso. Booted from CD Machine: IBM Thinkpad X22 Processor:Pentium III Memory:384MB Root Device: IDE, hda Root Size/partition table: [see attachment] Output of lspci: Base System Installation Checklist: Initial boot worked:[O] Configure network HW: [E] Config network: [E] Detect CD: [O] Load installer modules: [O] Detect hard drives: [O] Partition hard drives: [O] Create file systems:[O] Mount partitions: [E] Install base system:[O] Install boot loader:[E] Reboot: [O] [O] = OK, [E] = Error (please elaborate below), [ ] = didn't try it Comments/Problems: Configure network HW, config network - Installation system seems not to have either the eepro100 or the e100 module for the Intel PRO/100 fast ethernet card. Both these modules are in the base system. However, unlike woody bf2.4, it was not obvious how one can extract the drivers to a floppy for pre-loading. But since the base system is all on the CD, network configuration is not really needed. This won't be true for the business card version (which I did not try). Maybe an opportunity should be given in the base-config to configure networking if it hasn't yet been. I know base-config is not part of the installer, but maybe network config is not regarded as part of base-config. Another way is to instruct on how to extract the drivers from the packages in the iso. Mount Partitions - the mounting of the hard disk was fine, but the installer-generated fstab does not take into account that the CD device is accessed with the ide-scsi driver. The CD device must be manually remounted to allow further installation from CD. Install Grub - maybe this should be filed against the Grub installer. I think I saw this mentioned somewhere on the mailing lists, although not in any of the bug reports. The installer guesses the grub root wrong. So even though the grub boot loader, the kernel and initrd are all properly installed, the base system could not be booted. I was lucky to have a previously installed kernel with the proper grub root specification. Disk /dev/hda: 20.0 GB, 20003880960 bytes 240 heads, 63 sectors/track, 2584 cylinders Units = cylinders of 15120 * 512 = 7741440 bytes Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/hda1 * 1 557 4210888+ b W95 FAT32 /dev/hda224222583 1224720 1c Hidden W95 FAT32 (LBA) /dev/hda3 558 566 68040 83 Linux /dev/hda4 567242114023800f W95 Ext'd (LBA) /dev/hda5 5671341 5858968+ 83 Linux /dev/hda613421443 771088+ 82 Linux swap /dev/hda714442421 7393648+ 83 Linux Partition table entries are not in disk order signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- hi all, with actual linux kernel both ide and sata devices, by default, use libata which names both with sdx style names. -- Melhores cumprimentos/Best regards, Miguel Figueiredo http://www.DebianPT.org ---End Message---
Bug#218610: severity 218610 wishlist
severity 218610 wishlist thanks -- Melhores cumprimentos/Best regards, Miguel Figueiredo http://www.DebianPT.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c97d285.8050...@debianpt.org
Bug#597553: cdrom-detect: Need a simple retry or delay to mount USB CD-ROMs
I spoke too soon. If I let the drive completely stop and then wait a minute or two on the isolinux boot screen, the issue appears again. I'll try a few other things to see if I can wake up the device before mount is called. Tony -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c97dd0b.60...@awtrey.com
Processing of live-installer_26_amd64.changes
live-installer_26_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: live-installer_26.dsc live-installer_26.tar.gz live-installer_26_amd64.udeb Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon (running on host franck.debian.org) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e1oxp57-0007qu...@franck.debian.org
Bug#597087: debian-installer: Swap space is too big when created by the guided partitioner
Hi! On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 11:19 AM, Lennart Sorensen lsore...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca wrote: On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 10:16:42AM -0300, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote: Then the higher the RAM size available, the smaller the swap space created. On a system with 8GB, instead creating a swap space of 24GB (300%), we could have 4GB only (50%, or even less). Just a suggestion (that needs to be thought better). Doesn't suspend require swap = ram? Not everyone needs that, but some people do. Indeed. Then a maximum of 100% instead 300%? Starting at 300% on systems with little RAM, decreasing until 100% on system with a lot of RAM. Best regards, Nelson -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/aanlktingwfsb47phmkhe83r8xmvcvbp3t5sqpzddv...@mail.gmail.com
