Re: Full Debian install impressions and facts (another one)
Quoting Joey Hess ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): Matt Zimmerman wrote: This question should not be asked on a new install of libssl0.9.7, only on upgrades. Looking at the postinst, it seems correct: It's possible that an upgrade was involved in the install, if the CD had a slightly older version. This is highly probable as I used a d-i beta3 ISO for the test, which was made more than 1 month after beta3 release. If libssl0.9.7 had one release in the meantime, we have the correct explanation. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Full Debian install impressions and facts (another one)
Matt Zimmerman wrote: This question should not be asked on a new install of libssl0.9.7, only on upgrades. Looking at the postinst, it seems correct: It's possible that an upgrade was involved in the install, if the CD had a slightly older version. if [ $1 = configure ] then if [ ! -z $2 ]; then if dpkg --compare-versions $2 lt 0.9.7d-1; then Surely that $2 should be quoted for safty's sake. -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Full Debian install impressions and facts (another one)
On Fri, Apr 16, 2004 at 11:25:42AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote: On this install, the noflushd problem didn't happen. So I did the whole install at high priority. Thus, the debconf screens count is exact. Package name Useful Useless Total fr-Translated Should use d-i [...] libssl0.9.70 1 1 1 This question should not be asked on a new install of libssl0.9.7, only on upgrades. Looking at the postinst, it seems correct: if [ $1 = configure ] then if [ ! -z $2 ]; then if dpkg --compare-versions $2 lt 0.9.7d-1; then -- - mdz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Full Debian install impressions and facts (another one)
On Mon, Apr 19, 2004 at 12:37:42PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: Matt Zimmerman wrote: This question should not be asked on a new install of libssl0.9.7, only on upgrades. Looking at the postinst, it seems correct: It's possible that an upgrade was involved in the install, if the CD had a slightly older version. if [ $1 = configure ] then if [ ! -z $2 ]; then if dpkg --compare-versions $2 lt 0.9.7d-1; then Surely that $2 should be quoted for safty's sake. I agree. As-is, though, the code seems to work as expected, and so I don't know why that debconf note is displayed. -- - mdz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Full Debian install impressions and facts (another one)
This report is similar to the one I sent a few minutes ago but with some different test conditions. I had today a new server to be installed and got some time for doing some tests regarding a normal life Debian installation. The purpose was doing a standard desktop install test and see what happens, how long it takes, how many times the user is prompted and so on. The machine is a Dell Poweredge 400SC (SCSI U320, single Intel Pro/100 Ethernet, 36Gb hard disk) I used the Debian Installer beta3 netinst CD. The Debian Installer part went smoothly with all defaults. Not one single glitch. The installation was done in french (after choosing French/France in first d-i screen). At the tasksel step (which is the default package installation system proposed), I have chosen the following tasks: -Graphical Environment -X-Window System -Office environment -Print server (the machine will be a file/print server) -Traditional Unix server -French environment The debconf screen table is shown below. For explanations, see my former mail about a full install. On this install, the noflushd problem didn't happen. So I did the whole install at high priority. Thus, the debconf screens count is exact. Package name Useful Useless Total fr-Translated Should use d-i console-data 0 1 1 1 exim4 2 0 2 2 2 gdm1 0 1 1 popularity-cont.. 1 0 1 1 samba 1 0 1 1 xserver-xfree866 0 6 6 libssl0.9.70 1 1 1 TOTAL 11 2 13 13 A few conclusions: -- 1) Very low debconf abuse The final count is thus 13 screens to which one should add about 15 for Debian Installer itself. 2) French translation is perfect..:-) Glitches and/or general overview Same than former mail. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Full Debian install impressions and facts (another one)
[Christian Perrier] Package name Useful Useless Total fr-Translated Should use d-i [...] xserver-xfree866 0 6 6 Why do you believe these 6 questions are useful? In Skolelinux, we are able to configure X almost every time based on the automaticly detected HW info. I believe the X configuration by default _at most_ should ask one question, showing the currently detected hw and asking if the information is correct. If the configuration isn't correct, it could start asking about all the details. TOTAL 11 2 13 13 That should bring this down to 8 screens. :) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Full Debian install impressions and facts (another one)
Quoting Petter Reinholdtsen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): [Christian Perrier] Package name Useful Useless Total fr-Translated Should use d-i [...] xserver-xfree866 0 6 6 Why do you believe these 6 questions are useful? In Skolelinux, we are able to configure X almost every time based on the automaticly detected HW info. I believe the X configuration by default _at most_ Because I was really conservative in my judgement on that matter. Also because, for instance, I found the default value for asking whether the mouse is to be autodetected really strange (defaults to No) But you're right...for all these settings, just using the default value went OK. I just assumed this may not be the case for everyone. The debian-x people will probably add more input there. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Full Debian install impressions and facts (another one)
On Fri, Apr 16, 2004 at 11:52:01AM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: Why do you believe these 6 questions are useful? In Skolelinux, we are able to configure X almost every time based on the automaticly detected HW info. I believe the X configuration by default _at most_ should ask one question, showing the currently detected hw and asking if the information is correct. If the configuration isn't correct, it could start asking about all the details. Yes, esüecially since the X-Server generated config template is often better than hand generated modelines and monitor ranges. (with recent hardware) I think the debconf based x configuration is realy a step back into the stoneage. Even the xf86config was better than that. I remeber once a better configuration using xf86cfg, I am not sure if that isnt the better way? Es pecially it it is part of the base config. Greeting Bernd -- (OO) -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- ( .. ) [EMAIL PROTECTED],linux.de,debian.org} http://www.eckes.org/ o--o 1024D/E383CD7E [EMAIL PROTECTED] v:+497211603874 f:+497211603875 (OO) When cryptography is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
