Bug#665638: prevent debootstrap vom needing SHA256sums
On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 05:35:36PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: Mario Koppensteiner wrote: Am I correct in deducing that this mirror is one that was actually generated with apt-move, and that's why it's missing the SHA256 fields? Yes, you are correct. Can somebody please implement a parameter which tells debootstrap not to relly on SHA256sums and use MD5sums instead? Well, that would be insecure. Better to fix the mirror? Yes, I tried to fix the mirror but I don't unterstand the awk script included in apt-move. See bug [1]. Maybe someone of the Debian Installer Team can help and fix the awk script? Related to bug [1], I got a reply there asking if the md5sums are still neded somewhere in the debian mirror. On the official Debian Mirror I can still see MD5sum. Can someone of the Debian Installer Team reply to the post on bug [1] please? Links: [1] http://bugs.debian.org/662003 sincerely yours Mario signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#666530: cups fails to configure under cdebconf
Package: cdebconf
Version: 0.160
Severity: normal
Dear Maintainer,
When cdebconf is enabled, the cups postinst script dies with exit
status 15 (confirmed against cups versions 1.5.2-5, 1.5.2-8, and
1.5.2-9). Unsetting DEBCONF_USE_CDEBCONF to fall back to debconf
allows the package to install correctly. I locally repackaged cups
to add set -x to the postinst script and obtained the following
output, which may be useful in debugging:
Setting up cups (1.5.2-9~debug0) ...
+ dpkg-maintscript-helper rm_conffile
/etc/modprobe.d/blacklist-cups-usblp.conf 1.5.2-3 -- configure
1.5.2-9
+ . /usr/share/debconf/confmodule
++ '[' '!' '' ']'
++ PERL_DL_NONLAZY=1
++ export PERL_DL_NONLAZY
++ '[' 1 ']'
++ exec /usr/lib/cdebconf/debconf /var/lib/dpkg/info/cups.postinst
configure 1.5.2-9
+ dpkg-maintscript-helper rm_conffile
/etc/modprobe.d/blacklist-cups-usblp.conf 1.5.2-3 -- configure
1.5.2-9
+ . /usr/share/debconf/confmodule
++ '[' '!' 1 ']'
++ '[' -z '' ']'
++ exec
++ '[' 1 ']'
++ exec
++ DEBCONF_REDIR=1
++ export DEBCONF_REDIR
+ '[' -e /etc/default/cups ']'
+ . /etc/default/cups
++ LOAD_LP_MODULE=yes
+ '[' configure = configure ']'
++ getent group lpadmin
+ '[' -z lpadmin:x:112: ']'
+ chown root:lpadmin /usr/share/ppd/custom
+ chmod 3775 /usr/share/ppd/custom
+ '[' '!' -e /etc/cups/raw.types ']'
+ '[' '!' -e /etc/cups/raw.convs ']'
+ db_fget cupsys/raw-print changed
+ _db_cmd 'FGET cupsys/raw-print' changed
+ _db_internal_IFS='
'
+ IFS=' '
+ printf '%s\n' 'FGET cupsys/raw-print changed'
+ IFS='
'
+ IFS='
'
+ read -r _db_internal_line
+ RET='15 changed does not exist'
+ case ${_db_internal_line%%[ ]*} in
+ return 15
dpkg: error processing cups (--configure):
subprocess installed post-installation script returned error exit
status 15
Errors were encountered while processing:
cups
My apologies if this would be more appropriately filed under the cups
package; feel free to reassign if that is the case.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: wheezy/sid
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (700, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (300,
'experimental') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Kernel: Linux 3.2.0-13.dmz.2-liquorix-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores;
PREEMPT) Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8
(charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Versions of packages cdebconf depends on:
ii debconf 1.5.42
ii dpkg 1.16.2
ii libc6 2.13-27
ii libdebian-installer4 0.80
ii libnewt0.52 0.52.14-8
ii libslang2 2.2.4-7
ii libtextwrap1 0.1-13
cdebconf recommends no packages.
Versions of packages cdebconf suggests:
pn cdebconf-gtk none
-- debconf information:
cdebconf/frontend/text:
cdebconf/frontend/newt:
* cdebconf/frontend: text
--
Jacob Emmert-Aronson jr...@case.edu
Case Western Reserve University
Department of Physics (class 2012)
|_|0|_|
|_|_|0|
|0|0|0|
pgpmReaw5NA8V.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Processed: affects 666530
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: affects 666530 + cups Bug #666530 [cdebconf] cups fails to configure under cdebconf Added indication that 666530 affects cups thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 666530: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=666530 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.133320417411751.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Bug#666542: incorrect rendering of lat15 characters
Package: console-setup Version: 1.75 Severity: important User: debian-...@lists.debian.org Usertags: kfreebsd When I install console-setup on GNU/kFreeBSD, extended lat15 characters are replaced by weird fonts. For example, attached screenshot displays the output of ls --version command with Catalan locale. It should read: [...] GPLv3+: llicència GNU GPL ver. 3 o posterior http://gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html Aquest és programari lliure: podeu modificar��lo i redistribuir��lo si voleu. No hi ha CAP GARANTIA, en la mesura que ho permeta la llei. (don't worry about the copyright sign, this is a problem with original fonts too) My /etc/default/console-setup has CHARMAP=UTF-8 and CODESET=Lat15. Before installing console-setup, UTF-8 characters could be sent to terminals, and the subset of Unicode that can be rendered using CP437 worked fine. -- System Information: Debian Release: 6.0.4 APT prefers stable-updates APT policy: (500, 'stable-updates'), (500, 'stable') Architecture: kfreebsd-i386 (i686) Kernel: kFreeBSD 9.0-1-686 Locale: LANG=ca_AD.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=ca_AD.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash -- 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/20120331161334.4925.2416.reportbug@thorin
Bug#666393: marked as done (Debian Testing Install Successful)
Your message dated Sat, 31 Mar 2012 17:27:34 +0100 with message-id 4f773076.1020...@debianpt.org and subject line Re: Bug#666393: Debian Testing Install Successful has caused the Debian Bug report #666393, regarding Debian Testing Install Successful 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.) -- 666393: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=666393 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: installation-reports Boot method: How did you boot the installer? CD Image version: http://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/daily-builds/daily/arch-latest/kfreebsd-amd64/iso-cd/debian-testing-kfreebsd-amd64-businesscard.iso Date: March 30, 2011 ~6:00 AM US central Time Machine: Asustek K53-E Laptop Processor:Intel Core i5 Memory: 6 GB Partitions: Filesystem Type 1K-blocksUsed Available Use% Mounted on rootfs rootfs4160 3406244 45481916 7% / udev devtmpfs 2945104 0 2945104 0% /dev tmpfstmpfs 590272 752589520 1% /run /dev/mapper/debian-vg0--root jfs 4160 3406244 45481916 7% / tmpfstmpfs 5120 0 5120 0% /run/lock tmpfstmpfs 1180544 108 1180436 1% /tmp tmpfstmpfs 1180544 440 1180104 1% /run/shm /dev/sda4ext4508745 40988442157 9% /boot /dev/mapper/debian-vg1--home jfs 579127848 166124 578961724 1% /home GUID Partition utilizing BIOS enabled UEFI boot scheme Output of lspci -knn (or lspci -nn): 00:00.0 Host bridge [0600]: Intel Corporation 2nd Generation Core Processor Family DRAM Controller [8086:0104] (rev 09) Subsystem: ASUSTeK Computer Inc. Device [1043:1147] Kernel driver in use: agpgart-intel 00:02.0 VGA compatible controller [0300]: Intel Corporation 2nd Generation Core Processor Family Integrated Graphics Controller [8086:0126] (rev 09) Subsystem: ASUSTeK Computer Inc. Device [1043:1652] Kernel driver in use: i915 00:16.0 Communication controller [0780]: Intel Corporation 6 Series/C200 Series Chipset Family MEI Controller #1 [8086:1c3a] (rev 04) Subsystem: ASUSTeK Computer Inc. Device [1043:1147] 00:1a.0 USB controller [0c03]: Intel Corporation 6 Series/C200 Series Chipset Family USB Enhanced Host Controller #2 [8086:1c2d] (rev 05) Subsystem: ASUSTeK Computer Inc. Device [1043:1147] Kernel driver in use: ehci_hcd 00:1b.0 Audio device [0403]: Intel Corporation 6 Series/C200 Series Chipset Family High Definition Audio Controller [8086:1c20] (rev 05) Subsystem: ASUSTeK Computer Inc. Device [1043:1b43] Kernel driver in use: snd_hda_intel 00:1c.0 PCI bridge [0604]: Intel Corporation 6 Series/C200 Series Chipset Family PCI Express Root Port 1 [8086:1c10] (rev b5) Kernel driver in use: pcieport 00:1c.1 PCI bridge [0604]: Intel Corporation 6 Series/C200 Series Chipset Family PCI Express Root Port 2 [8086:1c12] (rev b5) Kernel driver in use: pcieport 00:1c.3 PCI bridge [0604]: Intel Corporation 6 Series/C200 Series Chipset Family PCI Express Root Port 4 [8086:1c16] (rev b5) Kernel driver in use: pcieport 00:1c.5 PCI bridge [0604]: Intel Corporation 6 Series/C200 Series Chipset Family PCI Express Root Port 6 [8086:1c1a] (rev b5) Kernel driver in use: pcieport 00:1d.0 USB controller [0c03]: Intel Corporation 6 Series/C200 Series Chipset Family USB Enhanced Host Controller #1 [8086:1c26] (rev 05) Subsystem: ASUSTeK Computer Inc. Device [1043:1147] Kernel driver in use: ehci_hcd 00:1f.0 ISA bridge [0601]: Intel Corporation HM65 Express Chipset Family LPC Controller [8086:1c49] (rev 05) Subsystem: ASUSTeK Computer Inc. Device [1043:1147] 00:1f.2 SATA controller [0106]: Intel Corporation 6 Series/C200 Series Chipset Family 6 port SATA AHCI Controller [8086:1c03] (rev 05) Subsystem: ASUSTeK Computer Inc. Device [1043:1147] Kernel driver in use: ahci 00:1f.3 SMBus [0c05]: Intel Corporation 6 Series/C200 Series Chipset Family SMBus Controller [8086:1c22] (rev 05) Subsystem: ASUSTeK Computer Inc. Device [1043:1147] 02:00.0 Network controller [0280]: Atheros Communications Inc. AR9285 Wireless Network Adapter (PCI-Express) [168c:002b] (rev 01) Subsystem: AzureWave AW-NE785 / AW-NE785H 802.11bgn Wireless Full or Half-size Mini PCIe Card [1a3b:1089] Kernel driver in use: ath9k 03:00.0 USB controller [0c03]: ASMedia Technology
Bug#666547: installation-reports: network installer freezes at Installer boot menu
Package: installation-reports Severity: important I followed the instructions documented here : http://wiki.debian.org/DebianAcerOne I downloaded and used these files : http://ftp.be.debian.org/debian/dists/stable/main/installer-amd64/current/images/hd-media/boot.img.gz http://ftp.be.debian.org/debian-cd/current/amd64/iso-cd/debian-6.0.4-amd64-netinst.iso Verified MD5 checksums : 62db0ccef71117ef5da70c068199547e boot.img.gz 4ea4c72e4c9eb6af8f2fa59c3d2b5248 debian-6.0.4-amd64-netinst.iso I can successfully boot from the USB memory stick. I hear a loud beep, and the Installer boot menu appears. But nothing happens when I use the TAB or ENTER keys. The network installer seems frozen, or maybe the keyboard is not supported, no idea. The Installer boot menu simply remains visible, until I press the power button during multiple seconds to turn off the computer. -- Package-specific info: Boot method: USB memory stick Image version: http://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/6.0.4/amd64/iso-cd/debian-6.0.4-amd64-netinst.iso 29-Jan-2012 01:40 Date: 2012-03-31 = date of the install attempt Machine: Acer Aspire One 522 AO522-C6Dkk (LU.SES0D.322) Partitions: Base System Installation Checklist: [O] = OK, [E] = Error (please elaborate below), [ ] = didn't try it Initial boot: [O] Detect network card:[ ] Configure network: [ ] Detect CD: [ ] Load installer modules: [ ] Detect hard drives: [ ] Partition hard drives: [ ] Install base system:[ ] Clock/timezone setup: [ ] User/password setup:[ ] Install tasks: [ ] Install boot loader:[ ] Overall install:[E] Comments/Problems: I'm stuck at the Installer boot menu, as described above. -- 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/20120331164914.ga9...@master.debian.org
Bug#666552: [grub-common] Bad GRUB / os-prober integration: Other operating systems removed from GRUB's list when os-prober is removed, duplicate menu entries
Package: grub-common, os-prober, grub-installer Version: 1.99-17 Severity: important X-Debbugs-Cc: 650...@bugs.debian.org X-Debbugs-Cc: 563...@bugs.debian.org GRUB doesn't depend on os-prober, it only recommends it. One obvious effect is that when installing GRUB, other operating systems are not necessarily detected. This was reported in #563204. However, debian-installer includes a fallback procedure to write a static /etc/grub.d/30_otheros in that case (for example, when installing from a netinst without a mirror). This itself has a downside - if os-prober is later installed, both 30_otheros and 30_os-prober will cause the addition of entries for other OS-es, so other operating systems will be duplicated. One less obvious and worst effect, which was alluded to in comments of #563204, is that the removal of os-prober eventually causes the loss of other operating systems. And this is both likely and non-trivial to debug. os-prober is only extra. Its extended description reads: This package detects other OSes available on a system and outputs the results in a generic machine-readable format. Unless the administrator reading this is very alert, it's unlikely he will think the removal of os-prober can affect GRUB. And when removing os-prober, there is no warning at all about an effect on GRUB. Also, the effect will only be seen after grub.cfg is updated and then the system rebooted, which will normally take days, usually weeks, so it will be hard for the administrator to realize that his removal of os-prober caused the problem when he notices the problem. The duplication of menu entries could be solved by removing 30_otheros when os-prober is installed. The loss of menu entries could be solved by writing a final 30_otheros when os-prober is removed, in prerm. However, it would be even better, and much less complicated to implement, to simply make GRUB depend on os-prober, which only weighs 128 kB, as suggested in #563204. This would in fact allow a substantial simplification of grub-installer eventually, and fix #650414 for free. It could also make os-prober-udeb unneeded. -- 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/4f773905.2090...@gmail.com
Bug#662086: (no subject)
Hi, just a follow up, while testing today's netinst image, I confirm the issue is still present and fails the same way. BR, Miguel -- 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/4f7739c4.5050...@debianpt.org
Bug#666559: installation with btrfs fails due to grub-installer error
Package: grub-installer Version: 1.70 Tags: d-i Installation fails while using BTRFS during grub-installer step. Log attached. Mar 31 18:07:45 grub-installer: info: Installing grub on '/dev/sda' Mar 31 18:07:45 grub-installer: info: grub-install supports --no-floppy Mar 31 18:07:45 grub-installer: info: Running chroot /target grub-install --no-floppy --force /dev/sda Mar 31 18:07:45 grub-installer: /usr/sbin/grub-probe: error: Mar 31 18:07:45 grub-installer: Mar 31 18:07:45 grub-installer: cannot find a device for /boot/grub (is /dev mounted?) Mar 31 18:07:45 grub-installer: . Mar 31 18:07:45 grub-installer: error: Running 'grub-install --no-floppy --force /dev/sda' failed. -- Melhores cumprimentos/Best regards, Miguel Figueiredo syslog.gz Description: GNU Zip compressed data
Bug#660196: marked as done (debian-installer: installing wheezy on a btrfs / takes =4 hours)
Your message dated Sat, 31 Mar 2012 19:24:22 +0100 with message-id 4f774bd6.6050...@debianpt.org and subject line has caused the Debian Bug report #660196, regarding debian-installer: installing wheezy on a btrfs / takes =4 hours 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.) -- 660196: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=660196 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: debian-installer Version: 20110106+squeeze4 Severity: important Dear Maintainer, *** Please consider answering these questions, where appropriate *** * What led up to the situation? tried installing debian wheezy on my system from a iso using a btrfs root file system * What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or ineffective)? tried making btfs on lvm and raid 1 also tried on my desktop machine with hardware raid and 16GB of ram * What was the outcome of this action? still took 4 hours while using the same cd iso and on same machine with ext4 took ~35min * What outcome did you expect instead? I expected the install to take ~35min *** End of the template - remove these lines *** -- System Information: Debian Release: wheezy/sid APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 3.2.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_GB.utf8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- The new kernel on d-i (linux-image-3.2.0-2) fixed several errors with btrfs. Closing this bug as this doesn't seem to be present with current daily images. Although this issue seems to be fixed, now the installation fails on grub-installer step. See bugs #666559 and #662086. -- Melhores cumprimentos/Best regards, Miguel Figueiredo ---End Message---
Re: GSoC project
Hello! Hope you don't mind, I took some time to dig into d-i internals, getting used with the code and the build system. I took a look at bug #610752 [0] and made a first attempt of a patch. I posted the git diff on pastebin [1], since I wanted to be sure it is ok before submitting it. Please tell me if this was the right thing to do. Firstly, I am not very sure about debconf_go return value. I assumed it returns 0 if everything is ok, based on the way it is used in other functions, such as netcfg_get_domain (netcfg-common.c), but I have not found anything explicitly saying so. Secondly, in the bug report it was suggested to remove NETCFG_LINK_WAIT_TIME, but I considered it could be used for setting a default value, since I believe getting timeout value has a low priority and there wouldn't be necessary to loop until a correct value is provided. In addition, could you please tell me what exactly does installation manual appendix updating implies? Furthermore, is it a good idea to keep a personal git repository containing netcfg sources with my changes? At the moment I have a local one, but I would like to host it on github, since I believe that way everything would be transparent but only relevant changes will be added as patches (or in any other way). Thank you, Sorina [0] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=610752 [1] http://pastebin.com/0ZAPnWGS -- 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/ca+qfqp_5dam_afm7tnr15qajnhdklcuwumdhjpgktdmy1ta...@mail.gmail.com
Bug#650414: Fwd: Bug#666552: Acknowledgement ([grub-common] Bad GRUB / os-prober integration: Other operating systems removed from GRUB's list when os-prober is removed, duplicate menu entries)
Original Message Subject: Bug#666552: Acknowledgement ([grub-common] Bad GRUB / os-prober integration: Other operating systems removed from GRUB's list when os-prober is removed, duplicate menu entries) Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2012 17:06:04 + From: ow...@bugs.debian.org (Debian Bug Tracking System) Reply-To: 666...@bugs.debian.org To: Filipus Klutiero chea...@gmail.com Thank you for filing a new Bug report with Debian. This is an automatically generated reply to let you know your message has been received. Your message is being forwarded to the package maintainers and other interested parties for their attention; they will reply in due course. As you requested using X-Debbugs-CC, your message was also forwarded to 563...@bugs.debian.org (after having been given a Bug report number, if it did not have one). Your message has been sent to the package maintainer(s): GRUB Maintainerspkg-grub-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org Debian Install System Teamdebian-boot@lists.debian.org If you wish to submit further information on this problem, please send it to 666...@bugs.debian.org. Please do not send mail to ow...@bugs.debian.org unless you wish to report a problem with the Bug-tracking system. -- 666552: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=666552 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#666616: installation-guide: FTBFS: build-dependency not installable: ko.tex-base
Source: installation-guide Version: 20110122 Severity: serious Tags: wheezy sid User: debian...@lists.debian.org Usertags: qa-ftbfs-20120331 qa-ftbfs Justification: FTBFS on amd64 Hi, During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build on amd64. Relevant part: ┌──┐ │ Install installation-guide build dependencies (apt-based resolver) │ └──┘ Installing build dependencies Reading package lists... Building dependency tree... Reading state information... Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable distribution that some required packages have not yet been created or been moved out of Incoming. The following information may help to resolve the situation: The following packages have unmet dependencies: sbuild-build-depends-installation-guide-dummy : Depends: ko.tex-base but it is not going to be installed E: Broken packages The full build log is available from: http://people.debian.org/~lucas/logs/2012/03/31/installation-guide_20110122_unstable.log A list of current common problems and possible solutions is available at http://wiki.debian.org/qa.debian.org/FTBFS . You're welcome to contribute! About the archive rebuild: The rebuild was done on about 50 AMD64 nodes of the Grid'5000 platform, using a clean chroot. Internet was not accessible from the build systems. -- 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/20120331193533.ga7...@xanadu.blop.info
Bug#665638: prevent debootstrap vom needing SHA256sums
Hi I created a patch for apt-move to solve the SHA256 issue. After I applied my patch to apt-move, debootstrap accepts the local mirror as expected. For reference please have a look at the bug [1]. Links: [1] http://bugs.debian.org/662003 sincerely yours Mario signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#655437: Confirmed
tags 655437 + confirmed thanks I have to confirm this. This (the problem reported by Martin) is particularly confusing when several flavours are possible. On a x86-64 system, I get this: Mar 29 15:53:14 base-installer: info: kernel linux-image-686-pae usable on 686-pae 686-bigmem amd64 686 486 Mar 29 15:53:14 base-installer: info: kernel linux-image-486 usable on 686-pae 686-bigmem amd64 686 486 Mar 29 15:53:14 base-installer: info: kernel linux-image-3.2.0-2-686-pae usable on 686-pae 686-bigmem amd64 686 486 Mar 29 15:53:14 base-installer: info: kernel linux-image-3.2.0-2-486 usable on 686-pae 686-bigmem amd64 686 486 Mar 29 15:53:14 base-installer: info: Found kernels 'linux-image-3.2.0-2-486,linux-image-3.2.0-2-686-pae,linux-image-486,linux-image-686-pae' Mar 29 15:53:14 base-installer: info: arch_kernel candidates: linux-image-3.2-686-pae linux-image-3.2-686-bigmem linux-image-3.2-amd64 linux-image-3.2-686 linux-image-3.2-486 Mar 29 15:53:14 base-installer: info: arch_kernel: linux-image-3.2-686-pae (absent) Mar 29 15:53:14 base-installer: info: arch_kernel: linux-image-3.2-686-bigmem (absent) Mar 29 15:53:14 base-installer: info: arch_kernel: linux-image-3.2-amd64 (absent) Mar 29 15:53:14 base-installer: info: arch_kernel: linux-image-3.2-686 (absent) Mar 29 15:53:14 base-installer: info: arch_kernel: linux-image-3.2-486 (absent) This needs to be fixed for wheezy. However, since the choices presented to the user are sorted alphabetically, the current situation must cause a greater usage of the 486 image on i386, which works around #650819. It may be wise to wait for #650819 to be fixed before uploading a fix for this one. -- 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/4f77899d.2040...@gmail.com
Bug#650819: Confirmed, serious
severity 650819 serious tags 650819 + confirmed patch retitle 650819 GRUB entries (grub.cfg) sometimes lacking other operating systems, particularly installing 686 or amd64 images (i386) reassign 650819 os-prober, grub-common thanks I have to confirm this. I was hit by this when installing from the March 22 i386 wheezy netinst on my laptop, a typical Intel Core i3 (x86-64) laptop with Windows 7. Although d-i detected Windows, after the install Windows was not listed by GRUB. I reproduced with a later businesscard, and then with a March 27 flexible way USB key with an updated netinst. I reproduced this about in 10-20 installs before precisely understanding when/why it happened. Thanks Brian for reporting. All the information you reported was precious in nailing this one. This is indeed an os-prober bug, or at least a bug of interaction between os-prober and GRUB. First of all, debian-installer typically calls os-prober 3 times. The last time is during finish-install (clock-setup) and although it nicely fills syslog, it is not relevant at all to this problem. The 2 other times are indeed from grub-installer. There are 2 os-prober packages, a deb and a udeb. Typically, both are installed. The deb may however not be installed, when automatic installation of recommendations is disabled (os-prober is only installed because it's recommended by grub-common) or when it is not available (for example, when installing from a netinst without using a mirror). Typically, grub-installer calls os-prober twice. The first is used mainly to verify the list of other operating systems detected, before asking whether GRUB should be installed. The (possible) second time is when grub-installer calls update-grub (line 845). update-grub's 30_os-prober hook calls os-prober if it is installed. There is an important difference between these calls. The first, direct, call to os-prober happens in d-i's context (it uses os-prober-udeb). The second one happens in-target (it uses the os-prober deb). This problem comes from this second time. Starting from version 1.45, os-prober's 50mounted-tests attempts to mount partitions using grub-mount, rather than using mount, if the former is available: http://packages.qa.debian.org/o/os-prober/news/20110424T183244Z.html http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=d-i/os-prober.git;a=commit;h=7ed9dec4d2c65056f211324f8e25a4d913b0f2a1 mounted= if which grub-mount /dev/null 21 \ grub-mount $partition $tmpmnt 2/dev/null; then mounted=1 type=$(grub-probe -d $partition -t fs) [ $type ] || type=fuseblk else ro_partition $partition for type in $types; do if mount -o ro -t $type $partition $tmpmnt 2/dev/null; then mounted=1 break fi done fi What happens here is that grub-mount fails, but the if's condition still evaluates to true because grub-mount's exit status is 0, and the code above assumes 0 means success. From that point, 50mounted-tests considers the partition mounted, and subtests quietly fail to find anything. This issue does not affect the first call to os-prober (which is outside the target) because which(1) is not available in the installer, so the condition is false and the tests fallback to the standard mount, which works. This bug (using which in os-prober-udeb) was fixed in os-prober 1.51: http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=d-i/os-prober.git;a=commit;h=94048e4ec7a8896fb2c9c917433fa5e3ba71fbbe However, that commit also introduced a check for grub-probe, which is not in grub-mount-udeb for now, as indicated in the commit message, so for now there is no functional difference; the first use of os-prober will keep falling back to the standard mount. Brian's finding about the subtle fuse init line was a hint to the reason why grub-mount fails. grub-mount needs fuse, and fuse is not in the installer's 486 Linux. Here is what happens: # grub-mount /dev/sdb1 /var/lib/os-prober/mount fuse: device not found, try 'modprobe fuse' first However, fuse is in stock (non-install) Linux images, so when installing the 486 image, grub-mount succeeds to load fuse because it's running in-target and it attemps loading the installed Linux's LKM, rather than failing to find a fuse LKM for the installer Linux. Of course, the installed Linux's fuse is compatible with the installer Linux's module ABI when installing the 486 image, but not when installing the 686 image. This is presumably also true on i386 for any non-486 image, such as amd64, however the 686 image is on netinsts and offered as a choice. It should be noted that at this time, the 486 image is more likely to be installed on 686 machines due to #655437, but this is merely a blessed misfortune. I do not know other architectures, but I imagine that this doesn't affect amd64, as the only image proposed for installation will be amd64, which matches the installer. So I imagine this problem is largely specific to i386. Back to the
Bug#637784: installation-reports: Partition disks error: No root file system is defined.
Le Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 10:06:06AM +0900, Charles Plessy a écrit : Le Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 04:40:38PM +0900, Charles Plessy a écrit : Le Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 06:26:45PM +0900, Charles Plessy a écrit : Using the shell console, I found that the partition table was the following: Disk /dev/xvda1: 1073 MB, 1073741824 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 130 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x0002dcf2 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/xvda1p1 * 1 118 947803+ 83 Linux /dev/xvda1p2 119 130 963905 Extended /dev/xvda1p5 119 130 96358+ 82 Linux swap / Solaris However, the device files /dev/xvda1p1, p2 and p5 are not available. Do you have any idea ? I tried to modify the partition table by hand using fdisk, and after writing it I see the following error message. WARNING: Re-reading the partition table failed with error 22: Invalid argument. The kernel still uses the old table. The new table will be used at the next reboot or after you run partprobe(8) or kpartx(8) Syncing disks. So the scenario is: - Partman partitions the disk, - the kernel is not informed of the changes, - udev does not create new links in /dev, - formatting and installation are impossible. Hello again, it looks like /dev/xvda1, where the Xen system is booted, is a special case and that in contrary to the other devices, like /dev/xvdb, etc., it can not be modified. The problem is therefore that part of the toolchain does not recognise in advance that it is impossible. Do you think that partman can or should obtain this information by itself, or that this bug should be reassigned to another package, which would be in charge of issuing an error message that partman can understand, to make sure that debian-installer does not assume that the disk has been partitionned successfully ? -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- 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/20120401005553.ga7...@plessy.org
