Bug#1024870: Scenario in which --extra-suites leads to breakage
Package: debootstrap Version: 1.0.128+nmu2 I attempted to bootstrap an Ubuntu jammy system, and got an error: $ debootstrap \ --extra-suites=jammy-security,jammy-updates \ --force-check-gpg \ --arch=amd64 \ jammy \ test-ubuntu \ http://local-apt-mirror.example.com/ubuntu I: Retrieving InRelease I: Checking Release signature I: Valid Release signature (key id F6ECB3762474EDA9D21B7022871920D1991BC93C) I: Retrieving Packages [...] I: Configuring login... I: Configuring libc-bin... I: Unpacking the base system... W: Failure trying to run: chroot "/tmp/test-ubuntu" dpkg --force-overwrite --force-confold --skip-same-version --install W: See /tmp/test-ubuntu/debootstrap/debootstrap.log for details The last part of the debootstrap.log file: [...] Unpacking systemd-sysv (249.11-0ubuntu3) ... Setting up systemd-sysv (249.11-0ubuntu3) ... dpkg: error: --install needs at least one package archive file argument Type dpkg --help for help about installing and deinstalling packages [*]; Use 'apt' or 'aptitude' for user-friendly package management; Type dpkg -Dhelp for a list of dpkg debug flag values; Type dpkg --force-help for a list of forcing options; Type dpkg-deb --help for help about manipulating *.deb files; Options marked [*] produce a lot of output - pipe it through 'less' or 'more' ! If I remove the --extra-suites option, the bootstrap completes successfully. It appears that the relevant portion of the script is not guarding against the possibility of an empty package list. --Daniel -- Daniel Richard G. || sk...@iskunk.org My ASCII-art .sig got a bad case of Times New Roman.
Bug#629842: Kernel BUG in ext3 filesystem creation
On Thu, 2011 Jun 9 07:56+0200, Norbert Kiszka wrote: > > Did You checked this hdd for bad sectors? Check SMART first if > possible. SMART shows no errors. Zero sectors reallocated, zero pending. Besides, a daily d-i image doesn't run into this problem. > PS. Why 486 kernel instead 686? That's the kernel that was in the "netboot" tarball... On Thu, 2011 Jun 9 07:14+0200, Christian PERRIER wrote: > > Is that fully reproducible? I guess it is as you recorded the problem > but still need asking...:-) Yep, I've hit this multiple times. Installing squeeze is currently not possible on this system due to this bug, I'm afraid. > Could you try with: > > - one official squeeze image (having the exact URL of the image you > used would help, indeed) I used http://http.us.debian.org/debian/dists/squeeze/main/installer-i386/current/images/netboot/netboot.tar.gz Dated 2011-03-15 02:54 UTC, size 8829576 bytes. I extracted the kernel and initrd, placed them on the hard disk, and booted via GRUB2. > - a daily built image downloaded from > http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-installer. Preferrably a > *netboot* (not netinst) image Already done---see bug #628752. That one had a different problem, but at least filesystem creation worked. I think this may all come down to a fix that needs backporting. -- 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/1307638476.27721.1461366...@webmail.messagingengine.com
Bug#629842: Kernel BUG in ext3 filesystem creation
Package: installation-reports
Boot method: hard disk (netboot kernel + initrd) via grub
Image version: 20110106+squeeze1 (files are dated 2011-03-14)
Machine: Dell Dimension 2350
Processor: Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.20GHz
Memory: 1GB
Partitions: ("fdisk -l" output below)
Disk /dev/sda: 120.0 GB, 120034123776 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 14593 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: 0x0ea91612
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sda1 1 9 722616 FAT16
/dev/sda2 10 14593 117145949+ 5 Extended
/dev/sda5 10 141 1060258+ 82 Linux swap
/dev/sda6 142 795 5253223+ 83 Linux
/dev/sda7 * 7961840 8393931 83 Linux
/dev/sda81841 14593 102438441 83 Linux
Output of lspci -knn (or lspci -nn): (see attached)
Base System Installation Checklist:
[O] = OK, [E] = Error (please elaborate below), [ ] = didn't try it
Initial boot: [O]
Detect network card:[O]
Configure network: [O]
Detect CD: [ ]
Load installer modules: [O]
Detect hard drives: [O]
Partition hard drives: [O]
Install base system:[ ]
Clock/timezone setup: [ ]
User/password setup:[ ]
Install tasks: [ ]
Install boot loader:[ ]
Overall install:[E]
Comments/Problems:
Everything worked fine up to the point of creating the root ext3
filesystem. Then a kernel BUG occurred, and the installer remained stuck
at a blue screen (with white underbar). The system is still responsive;
I can switch to the other terminals and poke around, but the installer
is horked.
The console log, recorded via serial cable, is attached.
Note that this error does not occur with testing/unstable installers.
--
NAME = Daniel Richard G. _\|/_Remember, skunks
MAIL = sk...@iskunk.org (/o|o\) _- don't smell bad---
MAIL+= sk...@alum.mit.edu < (^),> it's the people who
WWW = (not there yet!) / \ annoy us that do!
00:00.0 Host bridge [0600]: Intel Corporation 82845G/GL[Brookdale-G]/GE/PE DRAM
Controller/Host-Hub Interface [8086:2560] (rev 03)
Subsystem: Dell Device [1028:0147]
Kernel driver in use: agpgart-intel
00:02.0 Display controller [0380]: Intel Corporation 82845G/GL[Brookdale-G]/GE
Chipset Integrated Graphics Device [8086:2562] (rev 03)
Subsystem: Dell Device [1028:0147]
00:1d.0 USB Controller [0c03]: Intel Corporation 82801DB/DBL/DBM
(ICH4/ICH4-L/ICH4-M) USB UHCI Controller #1 [8086:24c2] (rev 02)
Subsystem: Dell Device [1028:0147]
Kernel driver in use: uhci_hcd
00:1d.1 USB Controller [0c03]: Intel Corporation 82801DB/DBL/DBM
(ICH4/ICH4-L/ICH4-M) USB UHCI Controller #2 [8086:24c4] (rev 02)
Subsystem: Dell Device [1028:0147]
Kernel driver in use: uhci_hcd
00:1d.2 USB Controller [0c03]: Intel Corporation 82801DB/DBL/DBM
(ICH4/ICH4-L/ICH4-M) USB UHCI Controller #3 [8086:24c7] (rev 02)
Subsystem: Dell Device [1028:0147]
Kernel driver in use: uhci_hcd
00:1d.7 USB Controller [0c03]: Intel Corporation 82801DB/DBM (ICH4/ICH4-M) USB2
EHCI Controller [8086:24cd] (rev 02)
Subsystem: Dell Device [1028:0147]
Kernel driver in use: ehci_hcd
00:1e.0 PCI bridge [0604]: Intel Corporation 82801 PCI Bridge [8086:244e] (rev
82)
00:1f.0 ISA bridge [0601]: Intel Corporation 82801DB/DBL (ICH4/ICH4-L) LPC
Interface Bridge [8086:24c0] (rev 02)
00:1f.1 IDE interface [0101]: Intel Corporation 82801DB (ICH4) IDE Controller
[8086:24cb] (rev 02)
Subsystem: Dell Device [1028:0147]
Kernel driver in use: ata_piix
00:1f.3 SMBus [0c05]: Intel Corporation 82801DB/DBL/DBM (ICH4/ICH4-L/ICH4-M)
SMBus Controller [8086:24c3] (rev 02)
Subsystem: Dell Device [1028:0147]
Kernel driver in use: i801_smbus
00:1f.5 Multimedia audio controller [0401]: Intel Corporation 82801DB/DBL/DBM
(ICH4/ICH4-L/ICH4-M) AC'97 Audio Controller [8086:24c5] (rev 02)
Subsystem: Dell Device [1028:0147]
Kernel driver in use: Intel ICH
01:04.0 VGA compatible controller [0300]: ATI Technologies Inc RV280 [Radeon
9200 PRO] [1002:5960] (rev 01)
Subsystem: C.P. Technology Co. Ltd Device [148c:2095]
01:04.1 Display controller [0380]: ATI Technologies Inc RV280 [Radeon 9200 PRO]
(Secondary) [1002:5940] (rev 01)
Subsystem: C.P. Technology Co. Ltd Device [148c:2094]
01:06.0 Ethernet controller [0200]: 3Com Corporation 3c905 100BaseTX
[Boomerang] [10b7:9050]
Kernel driver in use: 3c59x
01:09.0 Ethernet controller [0200]: Broadcom Corporation BCM4401 100Base-T
[14e4:4401] (rev 01)
Subsystem: Dell Device [1028:8127]
Kernel driver in use: b44
[0.00] Initializing cgroup subsys cpuset
[0.00] Initiali
Bug#592770: Daily build d-i + lenny + GRUB2: "Unable to install GRUB in /dev/sda"
Package: debian-installer Version: 20100805-15:58 Severity: important I am attempting to install lenny with GRUB2 using a daily build of d-i. After being prompted whether or not to install to the MBR, I get a red- screen error as follows: [!!] Configuring grub-pc Unable to install GRUB in /dev/sda Executing 'grub-install /dev/sda' failed. This is a fatal error. Looking at the log on tty4, I see what appears to be the output of "grub- install --help", and then error: Running 'grub-install --no-floppy --force "/dev/sda"' failed. The only instance of "grub-install" that I can find is under /target, and if I invoke that as shown in the log, I get Unrecognized option `--force' If I drop the --force option, I get /target/usr/sbin/grub-install: .: line 121: can't open '/usr/lib/grub/update-grub_lib' -- 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/1281634652.2418.1389614...@webmail.messagingengine.com
Bug#589213: Do not install Exim in minimal system
On Sun, 2010 Jul 18 06:09+0200, Frans Pop wrote: > > No. Those are *not* daily built images. Follow the relevant links from > the page I referred to! For netboot you need "other images". Oh, right---I see the different set of links, that go to various places (e.g. people.debian.org) not in the repositories. Missed those, sorry! > > But it's identical to the one for squeeze... > > Correct. Both are the last D-I release, not daily builds. Ah, so when you say "images based on D-I from sid," you mean a daily build of the installer image (which uses d-i and other components from sid), not the image that is itself in sid/squeeze (which would be the last release). I think I have it straight now :) So I need to wait for the next release of d-i images, and then for those to make their way into testing. Thanks for your patience, and all the work you've done. -- 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/1279427557.29612.1385407...@webmail.messagingengine.com
Bug#589213: Do not install Exim in minimal system
On Sun, 2010 Jul 18 04:46+0200, Frans Pop wrote: > > No, that's no update. Only a date change for some reason. The images > are still identical to the alpha1 release from February. One way to > see that is to check the kernel version: it uses 2.6.30 instead of > 2.6.32. Another is to check the /etc/lsb-release file or the versions > of udebs listed in /var/lib/dpkg/status. My understanding is that these were recently updated to fix the libblkid issue (see bug #587570), which had previously made the installer unusable. I guess they just re-built it from the same source as alpha1, modulo that one bit. > The error would *not* have occurred if you had used images based on > D-I from sid. So if I had used the one from http://http.us.debian.org/debian/dists/sid/main/installer-amd64/current/images/netboot/ it would have worked? But it's identical to the one for squeeze... > If you look at http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-installer/, you will > see three sets of links: > - squeeze Alpha1 release (these are the ones you used) > - current weekly snapshot > - daily built images Okay, so the weeklies come from testing, and the dailies from unstable. But the d-i images that are themselves in unstable and testing, those are formal, infrequently-updated "releases?" > The page linked above is the only authoritative source for the various > images available to install testing. Okay, though the netboot/USB/etc. downloads just go to the same place in the repositories where I was looking. -- 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/1279422828.20867.1385402...@webmail.messagingengine.com
Bug#589213: Do not install Exim in minimal system
On Sat, 2010 Jul 17 21:40+0200, Frans Pop wrote: > > I'm not sure what image was used by the bug reporter, but I assume a > current "D-I alpha 1" image. The alpha1 images date from mid Februari. These received a refresh a few days ago: http://http.us.debian.org/debian/dists/squeeze/main/installer-amd64/current/images/netboot/ I used the netboot tarball, from July 10. It's identical to the one for sid, so I had thought there were no pending updates to d-i or its dependencies. > Until today, the version of pkgsel in testing was 0.26, which does not > have my latest changes. As you can see from [1] my final work on > Recommends handling in D-I was done after the alpha1 release. But this same error would have occurred if I had used d-i from sid. When you say "release," do you mean, from daily builds to unstable, rather than unstable to testing? > I verified earlier today that with a daily built D-I image exim4 does > not get pulled in when popcon is installed during pkgsel. This is good to hear (as well as the fact that everyone wants to keep an MTA out of a minimal install). But how soon should a sid or squeeze d-i image with the correct behavior become available? -- 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/1279418959.13574.1385396...@webmail.messagingengine.com
Bug#589213: Do not install Exim in minimal system
On Sat, 2010 Jul 17 13:35+0200, Frans Pop wrote: > > So: as the reported issue is already fixed in current daily built D-I > images and as the Recommends in popcon is functionally correct, there > is absolutely zero need to make any changes in popcon. Okay, now I'm a little confused. So I see in the pkgsel ChangeLog that you addressed this back in late February. And I see that the current d-i downloads (netboot in particular) are dated early July, the same for both sid and squeeze. So why did this problem come up at all? Petter mentioned that version 0.26 of pkgsel was being used, but why would an early-July build of d-i use a version of pkgsel from last December? -- 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/1279393222.26560.1385369...@webmail.messagingengine.com
Bug#589213: Do not install Exim in minimal system
On Sat, 2010 Jul 17 09:56+0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: > > The obvious fix is to change popularity-contest to suggest instead of > recommend, to avoid pulling in a MTA when popularity-contest is > installed. Cc to the maintainer list to see if that is an interesting > alternative. Hunh. I wasn't aware that popcon could submit reports via e-mail in addition to HTTP. Recommending an MTA in light of that doesn't seem unreasonable, in the abstract. But given that an MTA is useless for popcon's purposes if it is not configured, and that HTTP submission has a good chance of working "out of the box," I'm inclined to think downgrading that to a suggestion would be sensible. > An alternative would be to change pkgsel/pre-pkgsel.d/90popcon to not > install recommended packages. Looking at the svn source, this seem to > have be the current setting in svn since 2009-12-24 (uploaded as > version 0.27). Not convinced it is a good idea to not install > recommended packages by default in d-i, thought, and suspect it is > better to change the recommends for popularity-contest. Yes, I see that... what is it now, the --no-recommends switch is broken? What source package do these files go into, anyway? Google pointed me to the d-i.alioth.debian.org site, but if I do "apt-get source debian- installer", there's nothing like this in there. (I'd like to verify that the current installer is using the same revision of this script we're seeing in SVN.) -- 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/1279355646.9862.1385319...@webmail.messagingengine.com
Bug#589213: Do not install Exim in minimal system
Package: debian-installer Version: 20100211+b1 (Note: I'm not sure that d-i is the correct package for this bug; please reassign if needed.) I want to install a minimal Debian/squeeze system. When the installer presents the tasksel screen, I unselect everything, even "Standard system utilities". Yet when the install is finished, I see that a complete exim4 installation is present, and running. This is, to say the least, inappropriate for a minimal install. I found a couple of discussion threads referencing this issue: http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=49816 http://www.pubbs.net/201003/debian/1016-fresh-debian-install-wo-exim.html >From the looks of it, exim4 is installed because of a Recommends: by the cron package: Recommends: exim4 | postfix | mail-transport-agent, lockfile-progs I believe the right thing to do would be to include in the base install a minimal, non-daemon-ized, "dumb" MTA capable only of forwarding and local delivery, to satisfy the mail-transport-agent dependency. (Forwarding won't work out of the box, obviously, but for cron and other system facilities, local delivery is all that matters anyway.) It would make sense to install Exim if the user selects the "Mail server" task, or perhaps even "Standard system utilities". -- 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/1279224248.32751.1385080...@webmail.messagingengine.com
Bug#587570: New, non-broken squeeze images are needed
Package: debian-installer Version: 20100211 Severity: grave The installers are currently broken due to bug 583551, which prevents mkfs.ext3 et al. from working. New images are needed, per tytso in this message: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=583551#117 Please ensure that the following executables, all of which use libblkid, run correctly: /bin/parted_devices /bin/parted_server /bin/partmap /sbin/blkid /sbin/e2fsck /sbin/fsck.ext2 /sbin/fsck.ext3 /sbin/fsck.ext4 /sbin/mke2fs /sbin/mkfs.ext2 /sbin/mkfs.ext3 /sbin/mkfs.ext4 /sbin/tune2fs /usr/sbin/fdisk (The non-functional parted_devices causes the installer to fail to detect any disks on the system. I can't say if that is a distinct bug, however.) -- 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/1277843952.30910.1382514...@webmail.messagingengine.com
Bug#509168: Dell Dimension 2350 + PCI video = kernel oops on bootup
Package: installation-reports Severity: important Installing debian-testing-i386-businesscard.iso, dated 17-Dec-2008, on a Dell Dimension 2350 with an add-on PCI video card. There is an existing kernel bug (see bug 507955) that causes the newly installed Debian system to oops and become unresponsive on bootup. (NOTE: Booting off the install CD works fine; the installer comes up and runs without a problem.) There is a workaround for this bug---blacklisting two kernel modules--- detailed in the above bug report. This is something that the installer would need to add to /etc/modprobe.d/blacklist (or some other file in that directory), not only because of the hard-to-diagnose nature of the problem, but also because the user would otherwise have to resort to a "rescue" environment to fix it. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
