jessie won't install/boot on a Dell Poweredge R815
I am attempting to install jessie on a Dell Poweredge R815 (I have four). It has been running wheezy reliably for years. And running squeeze reliably for years before that. But no matter what I try it won't install or boot. I have tried two ways. 1. I attempt a fresh install from a USB dongle. It gets all the way to installing grub and then fails. 2. I do a fresh install of wheezy from a USB dongle. It boots wheezy just fine. I do nothing but nano /etc/apt/sources.list (change all instances of wheezy to jessie, save, and exit) apt-get update apt-get dist-upgrade (It upgrades without error. I answer the default to all questions.) /sbin/reboot Then it fails to reboot and goes into the initramfs. I have a picture of the screen if anybody wishes. I can reliably install and run wheezy over and over. I have not been able to install or boot jessie despite numerous attempts. Any suggestions? If anybody wishes, I can provide precise details of how I built the USB image of the installer and what answers I gave to all the installer questions. But the short is, I did exactly the same thing on numerous other machines, including Dell T5500s, Dell Poweredge C6145s, and HP DL165s and was able to successfully install and boot jessie. I'm almost certain that the kernel upgrade from wheezy to jessie tickles something that is incompatible with the R815. Also note that while the fresh install was successfull on the C6145 (all four that I own), the hardware detection phase of the fresh install from USB took hours (all four) and booting jessie also takes hours to do systemd configuration of the network and MD arrays (all four). dmesg (all four) reports continual usb 1-5.2: reset high-speed USB device number 4 using ehci-pci even though nothing is connected to USB. The C6145s (all four) ran wheezy reliably for years (and squeeze for year before that) without such issues. I did the exact same install on my T5500s (eleven). These have exactly the same disks partitioned exactly the same way and none of the T5500s exhibit any issues. I believe that there are also issues with the change of kernel from wheezy to jessi that tickles something that is incompatible with the C6145, but is less severe than that that tickles the R815. Jeff (http://engineering.purdue.edu/~qobi)
Bug#827562: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Bug#827562: task-xfce-desktop: Depends on light-locker Should Be Recommends
On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 11:24:13AM +0200, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: > So yes, we *want* light-locker in the default Debian Xfce desktop. But that > doesn't mean you can't use something else with the Xfce desktop environment > under debian: just remove light-locker. Yes, it'll remove task-xfce-desktop > (except that I've never seen it installed after a standard installer run, but > I don't do that very often either), but task-xfce-desktop is just a > metapackage anyway. > > I hope the position is clearer now? > Your position is entirely clear and reasonable. It's the implementation I'm having trouble with. When you install task-xfce-desktop, from a dependency standpoint, it becomes the "parent" of all things XFCE -- the task is marked as manually installed; its dependencies are marked as automatically installed, and will be deleted by the package manager when everything that depends on them goes away. If you then delete task-xfce-desktop, all its dependencies lose their parent, and aptitude happily cleans up all of XFCE. I admit I'm walking off the edge of my knowledge of Debian policy and implementation arcana here. It may be that Debian 'task' packages are treated specially, and packages installed via a 'task' aren't marked as automatically installed. If that's indeed the case, then my bug report is moot. If not, then I believe more thought is called for here. Schwab
Bug#825931: s390-netdevice virtio interface choice misleading
Hi Viktor, On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 04:14:39PM +0200, Viktor Mihajlovski wrote: > if an installation is attempted on a system with a PCI network interface > only, it is necessary to select virtio as network interface to continue > with the installation. This works because the virtio choice is > effectively a NOP and both PCI and virtio interfaces don't need > additional configuration. But it's also confusing. > I'd like to suggest to replace the 'virtio' choice with 'other' for a > better user experience (see attached patch). > This has of course an impact on existing preseed configurations with > s390-netdevice/choose_networktype=virtio but in the long run it might be > better to accept the migration pain than to live with a multitude of > semantically equivalent choices (kvm, pci, ...). one question: Is there ever a situation where regular Linux network interfaces will be available while you'd need to also configure CTC/QETH/IUCV devices? Is such a thing even possible? If not could we simply skip that prompt if we see a regular one because then we know it's VirtIO/PCI/other? Kind regards and thanks Philipp Kern
Bug#827562: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Bug#827562: Bug#827562: task-xfce-desktop: Depends on light-locker Should Be Recommends
On dim., 2016-06-19 at 09:59 +, Holger Levsen wrote: > > I'm surprised this is news for you. This is not. And we're not going anywhere. > > Depends are used when something doesnt work without the depends. XFCE > definitly works without a screensaver. So you actuallu missed my point, sorry. There's no such thing as “XFCE” (btw it's Xfce). What we are talking about here is task-xfce-desktop which is tasksel task representing “the default Debian Xfce desktop, as installed by d- i”. One stuff which might represent “Xfce” here is the 'xfce4' metapackage, which doesn't have any relationship to light-locker but Depends on xfce4-session. xfce4-session itself has a Recommends: on light-locker, and you can safely remove it without removing xfce4-session (and xfce4 metapackage). > > As I see it, your point is that you dont seem to understand recommends. I think we can end the conversation here. -- Yves-Alexis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#827562: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Bug#827562: Bug#827562: task-xfce-desktop: Depends on light-locker Should Be Recommends
On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 11:50:18AM +0200, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: > On dim., 2016-06-19 at 09:19 +, Holger Levsen wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 11:08:56AM +0200, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: > > > Because we *want* light-locker as part of the default Xfce install. > > Well, having it in recommends is enough for that. > Then I don't see the point in having Depends: at all, let's replace every > Depends: by Recommends… I'm surprised this is news for you. Depends are used when something doesnt work without the depends. XFCE definitly works without a screensaver. Recommends are used when it's very unlikely that someone doesn't want this, but when it's not mandatory for functioning. Recommends are installed by default. So, no, replacing every depends with recommends is not a good idea. > Anyway, I don't know what you want me to reply. I think I already made my > point. As I see it, your point is that you dont seem to understand recommends. -- cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#827562: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Bug#827562: Bug#827562: task-xfce-desktop: Depends on light-locker Should Be Recommends
On dim., 2016-06-19 at 09:19 +, Holger Levsen wrote: > On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 11:08:56AM +0200, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: > > Because we *want* light-locker as part of the default Xfce install. > > Well, having it in recommends is enough for that. Then I don't see the point in having Depends: at all, let's replace every Depends: by Recommends… Anyway, I don't know what you want me to reply. I think I already made my point. Regards, -- Yves-Alexis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#827562: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Bug#827562: task-xfce-desktop: Depends on light-locker Should Be Recommends
On dim., 2016-06-19 at 02:01 -0700, Leo L. Schwab wrote: > On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 10:46:55AM +0200, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: > > task-xfce-desktop is for installation time, so here Depends is correct. We > > want light-locker by default, but people are free to remove it afterwards > > if > > they know what they do. > > > Uh, no, because when you go to delete light-locker, aptitude stops > you because deleting that hard dependency will break task-xfce-desktop. Except that (unless that's actually wrong, but then noone told me in years) task-xfce-desktop is here for install time. It's what we (the Xfce task maintainers, which are also the pkg-xfce maintainers, which is actually just me, but eh…) define as the Debian Xfce desktop. So yes, we *want* light-locker in the default Debian Xfce desktop. But that doesn't mean you can't use something else with the Xfce desktop environment under debian: just remove light-locker. Yes, it'll remove task-xfce-desktop (except that I've never seen it installed after a standard installer run, but I don't do that very often either), but task-xfce-desktop is just a metapackage anyway. I hope the position is clearer now? Regards, -- Yves-Alexis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#827562: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Bug#827562: Bug#827562: task-xfce-desktop: Depends on light-locker Should Be Recommends
On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 11:08:56AM +0200, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: > Because we *want* light-locker as part of the default Xfce install. Well, having it in recommends is enough for that. -- cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#827562: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Bug#827562: Bug#827562: task-xfce-desktop: Depends on light-locker Should Be Recommends
On dim., 2016-06-19 at 08:03 +, Holger Levsen wrote: > On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 08:57:44AM +0200, Christian PERRIER wrote: > > > task-xfce-desktop is for installation time, so here Depends is correct. > > > We > > > want light-locker by default, but people are free to remove it > > > afterwards if > > > they know what they do. > > I still don't see why this cannot be achieved by recommends, which are > installed by default… Because we *want* light-locker as part of the default Xfce install. -- Yves-Alexis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#827562: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Bug#827562: task-xfce-desktop: Depends on light-locker Should Be Recommends
On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 10:46:55AM +0200, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> task-xfce-desktop is for installation time, so here Depends is correct. We
> want light-locker by default, but people are free to remove it afterwards if
> they know what they do.
>
Uh, no, because when you go to delete light-locker, aptitude stops
you because deleting that hard dependency will break task-xfce-desktop.
It sounds like what task-xfce-desktop actually wants to do is depend
on a meta-package ('x-display-locker'?), of which both light-locker and
xscreensaver are members. Then the user could swap out display lockers
without breaking task-xfce-desktop's requirement that there be *a* display
locker of some sort.
Schwab
Bug#827562: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Bug#827562: task-xfce-desktop: Depends on light-locker Should Be Recommends
On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 08:57:44AM +0200, Christian PERRIER wrote: > > task-xfce-desktop is for installation time, so here Depends is correct. We > > want light-locker by default, but people are free to remove it afterwards if > > they know what they do. I still don't see why this cannot be achieved by recommends, which are installed by default… -- cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#827562: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Bug#827562: task-xfce-desktop: Depends on light-locker Should Be Recommends
tags 827562 wontfix thanks Quoting Yves-Alexis Perez (cor...@debian.org): > > > I suggest that task-xfce-desktop reduce the dependency on > > > light-locker from Depends to Recommends. > > task-xfce-desktop is for installation time, so here Depends is correct. We > want light-locker by default, but people are free to remove it afterwards if > they know what they do. ...which means we should mark this bug as "wontfix" (or close it, whatever solution is preferred). Thanks for your input. That makes things clear. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Processed: Re: Bug#827562: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Bug#827562: task-xfce-desktop: Depends on light-locker Should Be Recommends
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tags 827562 wontfix Bug #827562 [task-xfce-desktop] task-xfce-desktop: Depends on light-locker Should Be Recommends Added tag(s) wontfix. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 827562: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=827562 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
