subject:"question"

Question about https://cdimage.debian.org/mirror/CRAN/web/packages/psychrolib/readme/README.html

2024-02-09 Thread Olive Clinton

Hello


I’m Olive and I run an advanced AI service called ZeroGPT's Citation Generator 
: https://www.ZeroGPT.com/Citation-Generator


ZeroGPT's Word Counter is a Free and revolutionary tool to an innovative tool 
designed to effortlessly track and analyze word usage in your documents. With 
its user-friendly interface and advanced algorithms, ZeroGPT's Citation 
Generator streamlines the process of generating citation with all the format 
available, providing writers, editors, and students with a powerful resources 
and features.


I stumbled upon your website 
https://cdimage.debian.org/mirror/CRAN/web/packages/psychrolib/readme/README.html
 , and I just have to say: WOW!


I had a quick proposal, I was wondering, would you be interested in featuring a 
link to my website https://www.ZeroGPT.com/Citation-Generator in your piece 
regarding Citation Generator ?


I think it could be a great reference for your own article to provide your 
readers with more valuable information!


Either way, thanks for the shout out and keep up the great work!


Thanks,

Olive

ZeroGPT.com CEO

[https://www.semrush.com/link_building/tracksrv/?id=0045e1b4-38a0-4d14-96b3-51ceeb0c2b8e]

Re: question about weekly builds

2023-10-06 Thread UM Jérôme PEREZ


Thank you.

Le 06/10/2023 à 12:03, Steve McIntyre a écrit :

On Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 11:31:44AM +0200, UM Jérôme PEREZ wrote:

Hi.
To test weekly build, can i use apt-get or apt to upgrade weekly or is it
necessary to install weekly iso every week?

You can absolutely just run apt to upgrade whenever you like. The
reasons for the weekly builds are:

  * for testing of the installer
  * to allow people to install a clean new version of testing

Re: question about weekly builds

2023-10-06 Thread Steve McIntyre

On Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 11:31:44AM +0200, UM Jérôme PEREZ wrote:
>Hi.
>To test weekly build, can i use apt-get or apt to upgrade weekly or is it
>necessary to install weekly iso every week?

You can absolutely just run apt to upgrade whenever you like. The
reasons for the weekly builds are:

 * for testing of the installer
 * to allow people to install a clean new version of testing 

-- 
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com
You lock the door
And throw away the key
There's someone in my head but it's not me

question about weekly builds

2023-10-06 Thread UM Jérôme PEREZ


Hi.
To test weekly build, can i use apt-get or apt to upgrade weekly or is 
it necessary to install weekly iso every week?

Thanks in advance for your answer.

Re: Question - links included are on www.debian.org

2022-06-05 Thread Andrew M.A. Cater

On Fri, Jun 03, 2022 at 11:07:40PM -0400, Armando Zuñiga wrote:
> I would like to know what form I should fill out if I want to be a seller
> of debian netinstaller installer pen drives or if I qualify as a debian CD
> seller.
> 
> I would like to be a seller of official debian images in Chile, but the
> controversy that the CD's are staying is added.

Hi Armando,

I think the information you need is at:

https://www.debian.org/CD/vendors/info

and specifically at

https://www.debian.org/CD/vendors/adding-form  

If you are providing CDs today - it is probably worth providing the choice
of the official CD - which does not have non-free firmware included - and
the unofficial, non-free CD which does include firmware.

The situation may change: if you are prepared to offer both, then people
will have an informed choice.

With every good wish, as ever,

Andy Cater

Question

2022-06-03 Thread Armando Zuñiga

I would like to know what form I should fill out if I want to be a seller
of debian netinstaller installer pen drives or if I qualify as a debian CD
seller.

I would like to be a seller of official debian images in Chile, but the
controversy that the CD's are staying is added.

Re: Checksum file location question

2021-02-01 Thread Steve McIntyre

On Mon, Feb 01, 2021 at 04:01:55PM -0800, Rick Thomas wrote:
>The list of "recent" GPG keys on that page stops at 2016.  Maybe somebody could
>update that to cover 2020/21 ?

We haven't changed the CD signing keys since that was written. It's
something we've talked about doing, but not done yet. There used to be
some older keys too (hence the "recent" text), but they've all been
retired and I even re-signed the old checksums files at the time.

-- 
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com
'There is some grim amusement in watching Pence try to run the typical
 "politician in the middle of a natural disaster" playbook, however
 incompetently, while Trump scribbles all over it in crayon and eats some
 of the pages.'   -- Russ Allbery

Re: Checksum file location question

2021-02-01 Thread Rick Thomas

The list of "recent" GPG keys on that page stops at 2016.  Maybe somebody
could update that to cover 2020/21 ?

On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 3:15 AM Richard Owlett  wrote:

> On 01/27/2021 07:32 PM, H Kyu wrote:
> > Where can I find the file that shows a list of checksums for ISO Debian
> > images?  Thanks!
>
> You will not find *ALL* checksums for ISO images at a single URL.
> To find checksum of interest start at
> https://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/current/
> select architecture of interest (e.g. for amd64)
> https://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/current/amd64/
> select distribution format (e.g. iso-dvd)
> https://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/current/amd64/iso-dvd/
> at bottom of page pick your preferred checksum,
>
> Footnote:
> This information should really be accessible from
> https://www.debian.org/CD/verify
>
>
>
>
>

Re: Checksum file location question

2021-01-28 Thread Richard Owlett


On 01/27/2021 07:32 PM, H Kyu wrote:
Where can I find the file that shows a list of checksums for ISO Debian 
images?  Thanks!


You will not find *ALL* checksums for ISO images at a single URL.
To find checksum of interest start at
https://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/current/
select architecture of interest (e.g. for amd64)
https://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/current/amd64/
select distribution format (e.g. iso-dvd)
https://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/current/amd64/iso-dvd/
at bottom of page pick your preferred checksum,

Footnote:
This information should really be accessible from
https://www.debian.org/CD/verify

Checksum file location question

2021-01-27 Thread H Kyu

Where can I find the file that shows a list of checksums for ISO Debian 
images?  Thanks!

Question on multiple contributions to ftp.sunet.se...

2020-04-18 Thread Janet Ireland

Hi,

I'm Janet from The Coolist. Your site, ftp.sunet.se, has sparked my interest to 
contribute articles and resources in the various topics that you cover. I 
especially enjoyed one of your latest posts,  and therefore decided to reach 
out to you. 
I write on a broad range of topics and depending on what works best for you, I 
am definitely open to proposing and discussing ideal content titles that will 
benefit your site. If this sounds appealing to you, I’d love to have a 
conversation about how we could make it work.
On that note, a long term partnership is the ideal goal in mind and would love 
to hear back from you !
Thanks gratefully,
JanetDon't want emails from us anymore? Reply to this email with the word 
"UNSUBSCRIBE" in the subject line.

Re: [Question] Integrating the debian installer in live-build - DVD, multi-arch, custom, etc.

2020-04-15 Thread adrian15sgd

El 15/4/20 a las 20:56, dbgr escribió:

Hello.

I was not sure if this email should've been sent to both list. So
sorry if it should've not :-/

I am using the live-build version 20191221 (the one in testing) on a
debian stable/buster system to build an live image with and integrated
debian installer cdrom (with the '--debian-installer cdrom'
flag/option) with no problems.

My original plan with this image is to use it (also) to install debian
in both i386 and amd64 machines, with or without a connection to the
internet.

So, for me, I believe the best option would be to integrate a
multi-arch and/or DVD version of the debian installer. (even better
would be to integrate a multi-arch DVD installer - since debian
dropped this version of the installer I've been 'hacking' one together
=P)

Is there any way that you know of to integrate any of this installer
options (or even a 'custom' one) in live-build? Is there a plan to do
so in the future as an option?

Thank you for your attention.

dbgr

I advise you to use Super Grub2 Disk to boot either a live cd only image
or only an Debian installer only image.

It would require: Super Grub2 Disk 2.04s2-beta2 usb:

https://www.supergrubdisk.org/2019/09/08/super-grub2-disk-2-04s2-beta2-downloads/

https://sourceforge.net/projects/supergrub2/files/2.04s2-beta2/super_grub2_disk_2.04s2-beta2/supergrub2-2.04s2-beta2-multiarch-USB.img.zip/download

This usb image features a second partition where you can drop ISO images
to be booted from.

Debian live cds support booting with such a method.

Debian installation cds do not support booting with such a method (I
offered myself to implement it on 2015 but, lack of time, I didn't
implement it). So having the Debian installation cd as a single iso
image is a no-go.

But we are not done yet.

You can try to do something like this.

You dd the image, you make the SG2DISO partition big enough to handle
the Debian live cd iso and maybe a couple more isos.

Drop the Debian live cd iso on the already provided /bootisos/ folder on
that second partition.

You can use one of the SG2D options to boot into that iso.

Then you can make an additional third ext4 partition where you dump the
blue-ray iso contents (mount loop the iso) and, then edit SG2D grub.cfg
menues to have an additional menu to chainload the blue-ray content
grub.cfg which I guess will find itself thanks to its /.disk/info file.

What I'm not sure it would work is the installation part, I mean, the
kernel and initrd from the blue-ray disk finding their own root
filesystem and then being able to install from there.

That's what the debian-cd folks should clarify us. Is it the installer
ok on being booted from an ext4 partition? Will be able to install
Debian from there without too much hassle?

Or you can test it by yourself by just using
debian-10.3.0-amd64-xfce-CD-1.iso as a proof of concept (so that you
don't download the whole blue-ray).

Finally Super Grub2 Disk does not support Secure Boot yet so you would
have to turn off Secure Boot in some systems for it to boot. But,
anyway, if you did a manual build of Debian live cds you would have had
the same problem.

If you have doubts with the Super Grub2 Disk steps feel free to open an
issue at: https://github.com/supergrub/supergrub/issues and I'll give
you a hand there.

Re: [Question] Integrating the debian installer in live-build - DVD, multi-arch, custom, etc.

2020-04-15 Thread dbgr


Wow, that is a lot of information. Thanks for your time.

Yeah, I usually go with the 'keep a giant pool of .deb files to use as 
needed after installing using a DVD' rout, but it is not the most 
manageable thing and I was wondering if it was possible to have a single 
'always on me' pen drive that work as a live system in most of the 
computers that come my way. And the live-build is an awesome project to 
automate things, so...


But I understand it would be quite a time spend for something that would 
be hard to achieve, maintain and with a very small user base :-/


I believe the efi only nature of refind is a deal breaker for my goal, 
but I will look into every thing you pointed out.


About the need for i386 support and/or multi-arch it is a matter of 
context. The majority off the debian installations that I make is on 
machines previously running windows from a diverse group off people that 
want to have a free (as in livre) or simply usable system out of the 
box. A lot of those people (but not the majority) have i386 machines 
(cheap netbooks, 'old' computers or newer machines made using 
'rejected', out off line or cheaper parts/processors for a 'third-world' 
country/market) and/or don't have fast internet access.


I usually make this installations in events related to 'technology' or 
'installfest' and have both (i386 and amd64) installers ready in 
different mediums on occasion. But more than once I have failed to 
install the system on a machine because I did not had a proper installer 
handy on the daily basis.


To have a multi-arch cdrom installer (the one still provided as a ready 
to use image by debian) option in the live-build would still be awesome 
in this regard :)


Maybe someone else knows about some other alternatives too =P

But thank you very much.

On 2020-04-15 22:17, jnq...@gmail.com wrote:

Just to add something to what I just said a few minutes ago - of course
you say that you're avoiding using DVDs since you want larger
selections of packages such that the images will not fit onto DVDs (and
I take your word for it that you've checked that your selections will
indeed not fit), and you want these extra packages on disk to avoid
having to add them via internet download after installing, but consider
this: you could build images that fit on DVDs to perform the
installation with, and keep a copy of the additional packages on your
pen drive, which you can then just copy onto those systems and have apt
install, thus still avoiding apt download anything. (apt saves
downloaded package *.deb files to /var/cache/apt/archives; you can copy
them from there on an existing system to you pen drive, or download
them with `apt-get download `, then after installing Debian,
copy these packages to /var/cache/apt/archives/ and use apt to install;
apt will find them in its cache and thus won't download them, so long
as the version matches that which it wants to install).


On 2020-04-15 21:58, jnq...@gmail.com wrote:

Okay, but still, it's going to be a significant task to hack things
about sufficiently to achieve your goal, and you'll largely be on your
own in doing it, since it's not going to be worth the time of others
such as myself to assist with it I'm afraid. Even if you do achieve it,
I would not expect this to be of interest to merge into the official
live-build, and so then you've got the problem of time needed to
maintain it, rebasing it now and then upon new work going into live-
build if you want to be able to re-use your hack in future. I would
still not suggest that proceeding with this plan is a good idea.

To clarify, in answer to your previous query about whether live-build
supports integrating a hacked together multi-arch d-i, the answer is
no. Your plan will require some degree of hacking live-build itself.
It's a messy task, requiring learningto some degree how the live-build
codebase works, and is not helped by issues in the live-build codebase
such as `LB_ARCHITECTURES` confusingly being plural when it actually
just carries a single architecture.

I take your point that pen drives are more expensive that DVDs, but do
consider the value of your time in working on this. The value of the
time spent on it is probably going to easily dwarf that of the cost of
a second pen drive. Also, do you really still have any systems that are
only i386 that you actually need an i386 installer for? My mother's PC
is pretty damn old now and still that's amd64.

Something that might interest you is that you do not actually have to
"burn" the disc image directly to the storage medium to be able to use
it, there is an alternate setup possible such as that of rEFInd (or
whatever it was called) that someone else brought up in a separate
discussion here in the debian-live mailing list the other day/week,
whereby multiple such images can exist in a medium as individual
partitions, with an EFI bootloader that lets you select which one to
load. However, (1) it is EFI based, and so unless there's

Re: [Question] Integrating the debian installer in live-build - DVD, multi-arch, custom, etc.

2020-04-15 Thread Ian Campbell

On Wed, 2020-04-15 at 18:56 +, dbgr wrote:
> Is there any way that you know of to integrate any of this installer 
> options (or even a 'custom' one) in live-build? Is there a plan to do so 
> in the future as an option?

Is this what Calamares is supposed to be for? TBH all I know about it
is what I read at 
https://jonathancarter.org/2019/10/17/calamares-plans-for-debian-11/
via planet Debian some time ago, but maybe it's something to
investigate...

See also https://packages.debian.org/buster/calamares

Ian.

Re: [Question] Integrating the debian installer in live-build - DVD, multi-arch, custom, etc.

2020-04-15 Thread jnqnfe

Just to add something to what I just said a few minutes ago - of course
you say that you're avoiding using DVDs since you want larger
selections of packages such that the images will not fit onto DVDs (and
I take your word for it that you've checked that your selections will
indeed not fit), and you want these extra packages on disk to avoid
having to add them via internet download after installing, but consider
this: you could build images that fit on DVDs to perform the
installation with, and keep a copy of the additional packages on your
pen drive, which you can then just copy onto those systems and have apt
install, thus still avoiding apt download anything. (apt saves
downloaded package *.deb files to /var/cache/apt/archives; you can copy
them from there on an existing system to you pen drive, or download
them with `apt-get download `, then after installing Debian,
copy these packages to /var/cache/apt/archives/ and use apt to install;
apt will find them in its cache and thus won't download them, so long
as the version matches that which it wants to install).

Re: [Question] Integrating the debian installer in live-build - DVD, multi-arch, custom, etc.

2020-04-15 Thread jnqnfe

Okay, but still, it's going to be a significant task to hack things
about sufficiently to achieve your goal, and you'll largely be on your
own in doing it, since it's not going to be worth the time of others
such as myself to assist with it I'm afraid. Even if you do achieve it,
I would not expect this to be of interest to merge into the official
live-build, and so then you've got the problem of time needed to
maintain it, rebasing it now and then upon new work going into live-
build if you want to be able to re-use your hack in future. I would
still not suggest that proceeding with this plan is a good idea.

To clarify, in answer to your previous query about whether live-build
supports integrating a hacked together multi-arch d-i, the answer is
no. Your plan will require some degree of hacking live-build itself.
It's a messy task, requiring learningto some degree how the live-build
codebase works, and is not helped by issues in the live-build codebase
such as `LB_ARCHITECTURES` confusingly being plural when it actually
just carries a single architecture.

I take your point that pen drives are more expensive that DVDs, but do
consider the value of your time in working on this. The value of the
time spent on it is probably going to easily dwarf that of the cost of
a second pen drive. Also, do you really still have any systems that are
only i386 that you actually need an i386 installer for? My mother's PC
is pretty damn old now and still that's amd64.

Something that might interest you is that you do not actually have to
"burn" the disc image directly to the storage medium to be able to use
it, there is an alternate setup possible such as that of rEFInd (or
whatever it was called) that someone else brought up in a separate
discussion here in the debian-live mailing list the other day/week,
whereby multiple such images can exist in a medium as individual
partitions, with an EFI bootloader that lets you select which one to
load. However, (1) it is EFI based, and so unless there's one that
works for BIOS it's likely not going to work for you, and (2)
unfortunately there's an issue that prevents this from working
correctly with Debian images currently anyway, for which a solution has
not yet even been decided upon.

An alternative, for the time being, which would be a pain, I know,
would be to keep the two images on disk on your computer, and write
whichever one you need to the one pen drive you have, when you need it.

Another option to consider is netinst. This is a solution that involves
a small stub that runs on the system itself and retrieves stuff from
another system over a network connection. As long as a local network
connection to this other computer is available, this might work well
for you. You thus might be able to get away with fitting netinst based
installers onto DVDs/CDs, and setting things up for both i386 and amd64
on the hard disk of this other system they fetch stuff from. I am
afraid that this vague description of things is the best I can offer
you at present though as I have no experience with it and only this
basic idea of how it works.

On Wed, 2020-04-15 at 21:10 +, dbgr wrote:
> I believe I did not made myself clear. When I say DVD I am not
> saying 
> the medium itself, but the images that the 'debian team' provide to
> burn 
> to the medium (the ones with a much larger pool of packages than the
> cd 
> ones, capable of installing a whole graphical user interface/desktop 
> environment without the need for an internet connection).
> 
> I usually copy this images (or my custom one - larger than a DVD) to
> a 
> usb thumb drive (flash drive/usb stick/pendrive) using disk dump
> (dd). 
> And I was hoping to make an image using live-build to put in one of
> this 
> (they are much more expensive than DVDs here :-/) to have a live
> system 
> and a multi-arch installer (with a big pool of packages) in a single 
> 'device'.
> 
> Is there any way to achieve this? I would love to use live-build to 
> automate the process, but if anyone could point me in the direction
> of 
> doing it in any other way it would be very much appreciated :)
> 
> 
> 
> On 2020-04-15 20:32, jnq...@gmail.com wrote:
> > DVDs are cheap. I'd suggest that it is in no way worth the time
> > you'll
> > spend hacking things about to achieve this, when you could simply
> > have
> > separate i386 and amd64 discs instead.
> > 
> > I speak with no authority as to live-build plans, but afaik there
> > are
> > no plans at all to do anything in this area.
> > 
> > On Wed, 2020-04-15 at 18:56 +, dbgr wrote:
> > > Hello.
> > > 
> > > I was not sure if this email should've been sent to both list. So
> > > sorry
> > > if it should've not :-/
> > > 
> > > I am using the live-build version 20191221 (the one in testing)
> > > on a
> > > debian stable/buster system to build an live image with and
> > > integrated
> > > debian installer cdrom (with the '--debian-installer cdrom'
> > > flag/option)
> > > with no problems.
> > > 
> >

Re: [Question] Integrating the debian installer in live-build - DVD, multi-arch, custom, etc.

2020-04-15 Thread dbgr

I believe I did not made myself clear. When I say DVD I am not saying 
the medium itself, but the images that the 'debian team' provide to burn 
to the medium (the ones with a much larger pool of packages than the cd 
ones, capable of installing a whole graphical user interface/desktop 
environment without the need for an internet connection).


I usually copy this images (or my custom one - larger than a DVD) to a 
usb thumb drive (flash drive/usb stick/pendrive) using disk dump (dd). 
And I was hoping to make an image using live-build to put in one of this 
(they are much more expensive than DVDs here :-/) to have a live system 
and a multi-arch installer (with a big pool of packages) in a single 
'device'.


Is there any way to achieve this? I would love to use live-build to 
automate the process, but if anyone could point me in the direction of 
doing it in any other way it would be very much appreciated :)




On 2020-04-15 20:32, jnq...@gmail.com wrote:

DVDs are cheap. I'd suggest that it is in no way worth the time you'll
spend hacking things about to achieve this, when you could simply have
separate i386 and amd64 discs instead.

I speak with no authority as to live-build plans, but afaik there are
no plans at all to do anything in this area.

On Wed, 2020-04-15 at 18:56 +, dbgr wrote:

Hello.

I was not sure if this email should've been sent to both list. So
sorry
if it should've not :-/

I am using the live-build version 20191221 (the one in testing) on a
debian stable/buster system to build an live image with and
integrated
debian installer cdrom (with the '--debian-installer cdrom'
flag/option)
with no problems.

My original plan with this image is to use it (also) to install
debian
in both i386 and amd64 machines, with or without a connection to the
internet.

So, for me, I believe the best option would be to integrate a multi-
arch
and/or DVD version of the debian installer. (even better would be to
integrate a multi-arch DVD installer - since debian dropped this
version
of the installer I've been 'hacking' one together =P)

Is there any way that you know of to integrate any of this installer
options (or even a 'custom' one) in live-build? Is there a plan to do
so
in the future as an option?

Thank you for your attention.

--

dbgr

Re: [Question] Integrating the debian installer in live-build - DVD, multi-arch, custom, etc.

2020-04-15 Thread jnqnfe

DVDs are cheap. I'd suggest that it is in no way worth the time you'll
spend hacking things about to achieve this, when you could simply have
separate i386 and amd64 discs instead.

I speak with no authority as to live-build plans, but afaik there are
no plans at all to do anything in this area.

On Wed, 2020-04-15 at 18:56 +, dbgr wrote:
> Hello.
> 
> I was not sure if this email should've been sent to both list. So
> sorry 
> if it should've not :-/
> 
> I am using the live-build version 20191221 (the one in testing) on a 
> debian stable/buster system to build an live image with and
> integrated 
> debian installer cdrom (with the '--debian-installer cdrom'
> flag/option) 
> with no problems.
> 
> My original plan with this image is to use it (also) to install
> debian 
> in both i386 and amd64 machines, with or without a connection to the 
> internet.
> 
> So, for me, I believe the best option would be to integrate a multi-
> arch 
> and/or DVD version of the debian installer. (even better would be to 
> integrate a multi-arch DVD installer - since debian dropped this
> version 
> of the installer I've been 'hacking' one together =P)
> 
> Is there any way that you know of to integrate any of this installer 
> options (or even a 'custom' one) in live-build? Is there a plan to do
> so 
> in the future as an option?
> 
> Thank you for your attention.
> 
> --
> 
> dbgr
>

[Question] Integrating the debian installer in live-build - DVD, multi-arch, custom, etc.

2020-04-15 Thread dbgr


Hello.

I was not sure if this email should've been sent to both list. So sorry 
if it should've not :-/


I am using the live-build version 20191221 (the one in testing) on a 
debian stable/buster system to build an live image with and integrated 
debian installer cdrom (with the '--debian-installer cdrom' flag/option) 
with no problems.


My original plan with this image is to use it (also) to install debian 
in both i386 and amd64 machines, with or without a connection to the 
internet.


So, for me, I believe the best option would be to integrate a multi-arch 
and/or DVD version of the debian installer. (even better would be to 
integrate a multi-arch DVD installer - since debian dropped this version 
of the installer I've been 'hacking' one together =P)


Is there any way that you know of to integrate any of this installer 
options (or even a 'custom' one) in live-build? Is there a plan to do so 
in the future as an option?


Thank you for your attention.

--

dbgr

Re: Question on bad signature 180416

2018-04-16 Thread Thomas Schmitt

Hi,

Jorgen Ottosson wrote:
> $ gpg SHA1SUMS.sign
> Detached signature.
> Please enter name of data file: debian-9.4.0-amd64-xfce-CD-1.iso
> gpg: Signature made Fri 16 Mar 2018 09:50:55 PM CET using RSA key ID 6294BE9B
> gpg: BAD signature from "Debian CD signing key "

This is simply the wrong data file.

*SUMS.sign exists to verify *SUMS.
*SUMS exists to verify the files which it lists by its content (e.g. *.iso
or *.jigdo).

I just tried successfully:

  $ wget https://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/current/amd64/iso-cd/SHA1SUMS
  ...
  $ wget 
https://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/current/amd64/iso-cd/SHA1SUMS.sign  ...
  $ gpg --keyserver keyring.debian.org --verify SHA1SUMS.sign SHA1SUMS
  gpg: Signature made Fri 16 Mar 2018 09:50:55 PM CET using RSA key ID 6294BE9B
  gpg: Good signature from "Debian CD signing key "
  gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
  gpg:  There is no indication that the signature belongs to the owner.
  Primary key fingerprint: DF9B 9C49 EAA9 2984 3258  9D76 DA87 E80D 6294 BE9B

Important is that "Primary key fingerprint" is one of those listed on
  https://www.debian.org/CD/verify

Have a nice day :)

Thomas

Re: Question on bad signature 180416

2018-04-16 Thread Jorgen Ottosson


Sorry for an error in text below, the file containing:

da34180d8f618a6a311fe31fb08508496eb91601  debian-9.4.0-amd64-netinst.iso
341cbaf33c632891e23f0b2bffaebf2856a868fe  debian-9.4.0-amd64-xfce-CD-1.iso
c5dfa66c6885fbfe476b0da381d77145c994c629 
debian-mac-9.4.0-amd64-netinst.iso


is https://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/current/amd64/iso-cd/SHA1SUMS



The SHA1SUMS.sign file contains:

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-

iQIzBAABCAAdFiEE35ucSeqpKYQyWJ122ofoDWKUvpsFAlqsLi8ACgkQ2ofoDWKU
vpuaJw/+My2T7TuRb6VQVjqbQmBj8hrfK8/pwDXD1fu/b6p5h/aBPJroGSl/VJCY
URQe6fF/D1hxr1+odVahv8+FhoEsSEBet7Vvlfzw/1OAq327xBUlbHbxoOD0/0c4
bf5JWbPi1hxId2cIftnhoR3IeJPwaWdiUfF0E51Ci3ycLmQJmAPk/8wXsDDn4IE3
lerKYnLwKtohQNOOYbQ3k4795te2UjAVxbcraunqFu4nHjZZ907GoWQrzZtbURpx
R9HBVcKt+F7XOLGAIkKwACdUlmjYrhCIwY58ZCjzW69B1W7lPmbDT1TR4pICCqN+
HGoNnqTiDMwc5EGtCrZppByipB02qs5CNQBdoJwHpFKw+CwcyP68Jqx8YMo0KAri
roq/vWApMLO0bsRDmOoGjPbo8b1+MgeFw4NSbpqLSHGGQbegqyGPkz4DriSkzhd/
QmusgTA5nalIwDoJjAJeNFnLVYMPB7w/i+Jupaune4C5vQ4p0wu15YRKdwIfCY6J
67fPqx7wCrvqPWAGSNfRa4VyKQtjLWE8H83tAKkQFI8QdkNyBmzRFzH2zjW3BSLG
/mkEfqiwJmeKOwonKhSKPXRYde5GrTiiTR1gPnPXKeEkQJBTdI84SgeM87dMpAyY
uUv9p3rK7CEAGZdSCJmf27e1K0E7LOw1+ceXIRpAwvv9ipLtXDk=
=cSpx
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


/Jorgen




On Mon, 16 Apr 2018, Jorgen Ottosson wrote:


Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 11:11:27 +0200 (CEST)
From: Jorgen Ottosson 
To: debian-cd@lists.debian.org
Subject: Question on bad signature 180416

Hi,

I have tested verifying the sig on the SHA1 file from here: 
https://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/current/amd64/iso-cd/


but have not been successful in doing so.

Example:

-

$ gpg SHA1SUMS.sign
Detached signature.
Please enter name of data file: debian-9.4.0-amd64-xfce-CD-1.iso
gpg: Signature made Fri 16 Mar 2018 09:50:55 PM CET using RSA key ID 6294BE9B
gpg: BAD signature from "Debian CD signing key "

-

The SHA1SUMS.sign file contains:

da34180d8f618a6a311fe31fb08508496eb91601  debian-9.4.0-amd64-netinst.iso
341cbaf33c632891e23f0b2bffaebf2856a868fe  debian-9.4.0-amd64-xfce-CD-1.iso
c5dfa66c6885fbfe476b0da381d77145c994c629 debian-mac-9.4.0-amd64-netinst.iso



Am I missing something? This should indicate some error in data etc, if key 
was unsigned locally it would clearly indicate that the sig checks 
mathematically but is not trusted, ie sig checks but it not verified.


Any comments welcome.

SY,
Jorgen

Question on bad signature 180416

2018-04-16 Thread Jorgen Ottosson


Hi,

I have tested verifying the sig on the SHA1 file from here: 
https://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/current/amd64/iso-cd/


but have not been successful in doing so.

Example:

-

$ gpg SHA1SUMS.sign
Detached signature.
Please enter name of data file: debian-9.4.0-amd64-xfce-CD-1.iso
gpg: Signature made Fri 16 Mar 2018 09:50:55 PM CET using RSA key ID 
6294BE9B
gpg: BAD signature from "Debian CD signing key 
"


-

The SHA1SUMS.sign file contains:

da34180d8f618a6a311fe31fb08508496eb91601  debian-9.4.0-amd64-netinst.iso
341cbaf33c632891e23f0b2bffaebf2856a868fe  debian-9.4.0-amd64-xfce-CD-1.iso
c5dfa66c6885fbfe476b0da381d77145c994c629 
debian-mac-9.4.0-amd64-netinst.iso




Am I missing something? This should indicate some error in data etc, if 
key was unsigned locally it would clearly indicate that the sig checks 
mathematically but is not trusted, ie sig checks but it not verified.


Any comments welcome.

SY,
Jorgen

Re: Question about "unofficial firmware images"

2017-10-21 Thread Tiago Ilieve

Hi Daniele,

On 21 October 2017 at 09:48, Daniele Santu
 wrote:
> So, are those images basically Debian with a "standard" (non-Libre) kernel 
> (and so including ALL non-free firmware)?
> Or are those just a regular Debian, with a Libre kernel, and the addings of 
> only some non-free firmware?

The Firmware page on Debian Wiki[1] answers your question:

"Alternatively, we also provide parallel installer image builds that
also include all the non-free firmware packages directly."

So, it's a mix of both alternatives you mentioned: a regular (libre)
Debian kernel + all non-free firmware packages.

Regards,
Tiago.

[1]: https://wiki.debian.org/Firmware#Firmware_during_the_installation

-- 
Tiago "Myhro" Ilieve
Blog: https://blog.myhro.info/
GitHub: https://github.com/myhro
LinkedIn: https://de.linkedin.com/in/myhro
Berlin, Deutschland

Question about "unofficial firmware images"

2017-10-21 Thread Daniele Santu

Hello,

first of all, as always, thanks for the great work with Debian... It's
still the best GNU/Linux distro on the "market"!

I have a question regarding the "unofficial firmware images", there's
something unclear to me: in the site it says

"Non-free Firmware

For convenience for some users, this *unofficial* alternative build
includes non-free firmware for extra support for some awkward hardware."

So, are those images basically Debian with a "standard" (non-Libre) kernel
(and so including ALL non-free firmware)?
Or are those just a regular Debian, with a Libre kernel, and the addings of
only some non-free firmware?

Thanks in advance for the answer, wish all of you a good day,

Daniele Santu

Re: [Question] Only three DVD images on the server?

2017-09-13 Thread Steve McIntyre

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 01:04:32PM +, Nico Schmoigl wrote:
>
>Hi folks,
>
>I am currently a little confused on the content of
>https://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/current/amd64/iso-dvd/:
>I do see there the following three files:
>
>debian-9.1.0-amd64-DVD-1.iso
>debian-9.1.0-amd64-DVD-2.iso
>debian-9.1.0-amd64-DVD-3.iso
>
>There is no 4th or 5th image available. Requesting the fourth image at 
>https://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/current/amd64/iso-dvd/debian-9.1.0-amd64-DVD-4.iso
>also fails with a 404 HTTP error.
>Yet, the SHA256SUMS file at
>https://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/current/amd64/iso-dvd/SHA256SUMS lists
>images up to number 14.
>
>Is there something broken with the server or is this intentional (whose
>announcement I simply might have missed)?

Hi Nico,

See

https://www.debian.org/CD/faq/#not-all-images

-- 
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com
Is there anybody out there?

[Question] Only three DVD images on the server?

2017-09-13 Thread Nico Schmoigl



Hi folks,

I am currently a little confused on the content of  
https://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/current/amd64/iso-dvd/:

I do see there the following three files:

debian-9.1.0-amd64-DVD-1.iso
debian-9.1.0-amd64-DVD-2.iso
debian-9.1.0-amd64-DVD-3.iso

There is no 4th or 5th image available. Requesting the fourth image at  
https://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/current/amd64/iso-dvd/debian-9.1.0-amd64-DVD-4.iso also fails with a 404 HTTP  
error.
Yet, the SHA256SUMS file at  
https://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/current/amd64/iso-dvd/SHA256SUMS  
lists images up to number 14.


Is there something broken with the server or is this intentional  
(whose announcement I simply might have missed)?


Thanks for checking!

Kind regards,
Nico

Re: Question about Debian Stretch Live images

2017-06-22 Thread Steve McIntyre

On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 06:22:51PM +0200, Daniele Santu wrote:
>Hi,
>
>first of all, thanks for your awesome work. :)
>I just wanted to ask something, maybe already frequently asked these days
>(sorry if this is the case): do you plan to (shortly?) release updated 9.0.2
>images because of the still present bugs in 9.0.1?
>Keep the good work going and thanks again!

I don't think we have any major bugs remaining in the 9.0.1
images. I'm still working on fixes for some of the issues that do
exist, but I'm now only expecting to build and release a new set of
images for 9.1, the first Stretch point release. If that follows the
normal pattern, expect to see that about a month after the initial
stretch release.

>P.S. Sorry for my not-perfect English, not a native speaker!

No problem, it's perfectly clear! :-)

-- 
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com
"The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that
 English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don't just borrow words; on
 occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them
 unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary."  -- James D. Nicoll

Question about Debian Stretch Live images

2017-06-22 Thread Daniele Santu

Hi,

first of all, thanks for your awesome work. :)
I just wanted to ask something, maybe already frequently asked these days
(sorry if this is the case): do you plan to (shortly?) release updated
9.0.2 images because of the still present bugs in 9.0.1?
Keep the good work going and thanks again!

P.S. Sorry for my not-perfect English, not a native speaker!

Re: Question about the new directory naming scheme of nonfree Wheezy live images

2016-07-26 Thread Raphaël Halimi

Le 27/07/2016 à 00:54, Steve McIntyre a écrit :
> Apologies, that's a mistake on my part and thanks for pointing it
> out. I'll push them into the right place... now.

No problem :)

Regards,

-- 
Raphaël Halimi



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Question about the new directory naming scheme of nonfree Wheezy live images

2016-07-26 Thread Steve McIntyre

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 12:46:16AM +0200, Raphaël Halimi wrote:
>Le 26/07/2016 à 22:55, Steve McIntyre a écrit :
>> On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 06:58:12PM +0200, Raphaël Halimi wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Why did it change ? Are future releases of Jessie expected to adopt the
>>> same naming scheme too ?
>>>
>>> I need to know this because, aside of curiosity, I have a shell script
>>> run daily that downloads those live images in order to feed a PXE
>>> server. If the naming scheme changes, I have to modify the script.
>> 
>> Hi Raphaël,
>> 
>> I don't think there's been any deliberate change to the naming
>> scheme. What do you think has changed?
>
>Old scheme:
>
>/cdimage/unofficial/non-free/cd-including-firmware/archive/7.10.0-live+nonfree/$ARCH/...
>
>New scheme:
>
>/cdimage/unofficial/non-free/cd-including-firmware/archive/7.11.0+nonfree/live-non-free/$ARCH/...

Apologies, that's a mistake on my part and thanks for pointing it
out. I'll push them into the right place... now.

-- 
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com
You raise the blade, you make the change... You re-arrange me 'til I'm sane...

Re: Question about the new directory naming scheme of nonfree Wheezy live images

2016-07-26 Thread Raphaël Halimi

Le 26/07/2016 à 22:55, Steve McIntyre a écrit :
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 06:58:12PM +0200, Raphaël Halimi wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Why did it change ? Are future releases of Jessie expected to adopt the
>> same naming scheme too ?
>>
>> I need to know this because, aside of curiosity, I have a shell script
>> run daily that downloads those live images in order to feed a PXE
>> server. If the naming scheme changes, I have to modify the script.
> 
> Hi Raphaël,
> 
> I don't think there's been any deliberate change to the naming
> scheme. What do you think has changed?

Old scheme:

/cdimage/unofficial/non-free/cd-including-firmware/archive/7.10.0-live+nonfree/$ARCH/...

New scheme:

/cdimage/unofficial/non-free/cd-including-firmware/archive/7.11.0+nonfree/live-non-free/$ARCH/...

Regards,

-- 
Raphaël Halimi



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Question about the new directory naming scheme of nonfree Wheezy live images

2016-07-26 Thread Steve McIntyre

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 06:58:12PM +0200, Raphaël Halimi wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Why did it change ? Are future releases of Jessie expected to adopt the
>same naming scheme too ?
>
>I need to know this because, aside of curiosity, I have a shell script
>run daily that downloads those live images in order to feed a PXE
>server. If the naming scheme changes, I have to modify the script.

Hi Raphaël,

I don't think there's been any deliberate change to the naming
scheme. What do you think has changed?

-- 
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com
You lock the door
And throw away the key
There's someone in my head but it's not me

Question about the new directory naming scheme of nonfree Wheezy live images

2016-07-26 Thread Raphaël Halimi

Hi,

Why did it change ? Are future releases of Jessie expected to adopt the
same naming scheme too ?

I need to know this because, aside of curiosity, I have a shell script
run daily that downloads those live images in order to feed a PXE
server. If the naming scheme changes, I have to modify the script.

Regards,

-- 
Raphaël Halimi



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: CD verification key question

2016-06-22 Thread Neil Williams

On Wed, 22 Jun 2016 17:42:36 + (UTC)
Grzegorz Bereta  wrote:

> Dear Sir or Madam,
> 
> I was trying to verify my Debian download following these
> instructions:
> 
> https://www.debian.org/CD/verify.en.html
> 
> and found the second part of the instructions (below) unclear:
> 
> "To ensure that the checksums files themselves are correct, use GnuPG
> to verify them against the accompanying signature files (e.g.
> MD5SSUMS.sign). The keys used for these signatures are all in the
> Debian GPG keyring and the best way to check them is to use that
> keyring to validate via the web of trust"
> 
> My understanding of the above is that I need keys to decipher the
> X.sign file so that I can compare it with the checksum file. Don't I
> need a KeyID to get the proper key? Where/how do I get it? 

0: You can simply use the checksums.
1: You can also verify the GnuPG signature without needing a GnuPG key
of your own with gpg --verify X.sign
2: You can verify the key used to make the GnuPG signature if you
already have a GnuPG key and which is part of the web of trust.

GnuPG handles the .sign file, that stage does not need you to have a
GnuPG key. The signature itself does not contain anything you can
compare with the checksum file yourself. GnuPG verifies that the
checksum file is the same as it was when the signature was created and
provides information about the key used to make that signature. The
verification of that key is then down to your link into the GnuPG web
of trust.

Without a key of your own (or with a key which doesn't have a link into
the web of trust) you still get verification that the checksum file is
valid and that the signature is valid. The fingerprint of the key used
to create the signature is printed when gpg verifies the X.sign file.
This fingerprint can be verified by looking up the key on keyservers to
ensure that the fingerprint on the debian website is correct.

With MD5SUMS and MD5SUMS.sign in the same directory:

$ gpg --verify --verbose MD5SUMS.sign 
gpg: armor header: Version: GnuPG v1
gpg: assuming signed data in `MD5SUMS'
gpg: Signature made Sun 05 Jun 2016 16:59:39 BST using RSA key ID 6294BE9B

From the website, the fingerprint of the key with the short ID 6294BE9B
is DF9B 9C49 EAA9 2984 3258  9D76 DA87 E80D 6294 BE9B

(collapse the fingerprint, taking out the spaces)

$ gpg --keyring keyring.debian.org --recv-key 
DF9B9C49EAA9298432589D76DA87E80D6294BE9B
gpg: requesting key 6294BE9B from hkp server keyring.debian.org
gpg: key 6294BE9B: public key "Debian CD signing key 
" imported
gpg: Total number processed: 1
gpg:   imported: 1  (RSA: 1)

If your key is not in the web of trust (or if you haven't updated your
local gpg trust settings since importing this key), you'll get:

$ gpg --verify MD5SUMS.sign 
gpg: assuming signed data in `MD5SUMS'
gpg: Signature made Sun 05 Jun 2016 16:59:39 BST using RSA key ID 6294BE9B
gpg: please do a --check-trustdb
gpg: Good signature from "Debian CD signing key "
gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
gpg:  There is no indication that the signature belongs to the owner.
Primary key fingerprint: DF9B 9C49 EAA9 2984 3258  9D76 DA87 E80D 6294 BE9B

My key is part of the web of trust (I've been fortunate enough to get
signatures from Steve and a few dozen other people in the Debian
keyring), so I can proceed to:

$ gpg: --check-trustdb
$ gpg --verify MD5SUMS.sign 
gpg: assuming signed data in `MD5SUMS'
gpg: Signature made Sun 05 Jun 2016 16:59:39 BST using RSA key ID 6294BE9B
gpg: Good signature from "Debian CD signing key "

Yes, the gpg interface is obscure and quite unhelpful. It is important
to receive keys using the full fingerprint, not the short key id which
is (sadly) all that gpg --verify outputs until the key has already been
imported.

Other steps you can do are:

$ gpg --recv-key DF9B9C49EAA9298432589D76DA87E80D6294BE9B
(this just updates the key from other keyservers, in case it's been
revoked without being updated on keyring.debian.org)

You can google the fingerprint(s) from
https://www.debian.org/CD/verify.en.html which brings up a range of
sites giving you something like the above set of commands with a bit more 
background.
e.g.
https://linuxconfig.org/how-to-verify-an-authenticity-of-downloaded-debian-iso-images

-- 

Neil Williams
=
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/

pgpTDUrEw8XiX.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: CD verification key question

2016-06-22 Thread Steve McIntyre

On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 05:42:36PM +, Grzegorz Bereta wrote:
>Dear Sir or Madam,
>
>I was trying to verify my Debian download following these instructions:
>
>https://www.debian.org/CD/verify.en.html
>
>and found the second part of the instructions (below) unclear:
>
>"To ensure that the checksums files themselves are correct, use GnuPG
>to verify them against the accompanying signature files
>(e.g. MD5SSUMS.sign). The keys used for these signatures are all in
>the Debian GPG keyring and the best way to check them is to use that
>keyring to validate via the web of trust"
>
>My understanding of the above is that I need keys to decipher the X.sign file 
>so that I can compare it with the checksum file. Don't I need a KeyID to
>get the proper key? Where/how do I get it? 

In that same page, the keys are listed immediately below what you've
just quoted:

pub   4096R/64E6EA7D 2009-10-03
  Key fingerprint = 1046 0DAD 7616 5AD8 1FBC  0CE9 9880 21A9 64E6 EA7D
uid  Debian CD signing key 

pub   4096R/6294BE9B 2011-01-05
  Key fingerprint = DF9B 9C49 EAA9 2984 3258  9D76 DA87 E80D 6294 BE9B
uid  Debian CD signing key 
sub   4096R/11CD9819 2011-01-05

pub   4096R/09EA8AC3 2014-04-15
  Key fingerprint = F41D 3034 2F35 4669 5F65  C669 4246 8F40 09EA 8AC3
uid  Debian Testing CDs Automatic Signing Key 

sub   4096R/6BD05CFB 2014-04-15

-- 
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com
"Managing a volunteer open source project is a lot like herding
 kittens, except the kittens randomly appear and disappear because they
 have day jobs." -- Matt Mackall

CD verification key question

2016-06-22 Thread Grzegorz Bereta

Dear Sir or Madam,

I was trying to verify my Debian download following these instructions:

https://www.debian.org/CD/verify.en.html

and found the second part of the instructions (below) unclear:

"To ensure that the checksums files themselves are correct, use GnuPG to verify 
them against the accompanying signature files (e.g. MD5SSUMS.sign). The keys 
used for these signatures are all in the Debian GPG keyring and the best way to 
check them is to use that keyring to validate via the web of trust"

My understanding of the above is that I need keys to decipher the X.sign file 
so that I can compare it with the checksum file. Don't I need a KeyID to
get the proper key? Where/how do I get it? 

Best regards,
Greg Bereta

Re: stretch installer question

2016-05-22 Thread Jude DaShiell

I don't need ssh-server, I need ssh-client and that's what was missing. 
Beyond that though, why is iwconfig on any of these isos?  The iw 
package was supposed to have replaced iwconfig especially with the more 
modern linux kernels.


On Sun, 22 May 2016, Steve McIntyre wrote:


Date: Sat, 21 May 2016 19:31:38
From: Steve McIntyre 
To: Jude DaShiell 
Cc: debian-cd@lists.debian.org, debian-b...@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: stretch installer question

On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 12:13:10PM -0400, Jude DaShiell wrote:

Is the package selection section of the stretch installer as broken in all
versions as it is in the x86_64 version of firmware testing iso?  I preserved
logs but once installation was finished and system rebooted, ssh was nowhere
to be found on the new system.  I may be able to copy the installation log or
logs off of the new system onto a flash drive then copy those logs back onto
another hard drive to send them along but can't do it directly from the newly
installed system since neither telnet rlogin or ssh got onto it.


Not everybody wants to run servers (even ssh) by default on new
machine installations, so ssh isn't installed *by default*. However,
there is an option in tasksel to install "SSH server" if that's what
you want.




--

Re: stretch installer question

2016-05-21 Thread Steve McIntyre

On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 12:13:10PM -0400, Jude DaShiell wrote:
>Is the package selection section of the stretch installer as broken in all
>versions as it is in the x86_64 version of firmware testing iso?  I preserved
>logs but once installation was finished and system rebooted, ssh was nowhere
>to be found on the new system.  I may be able to copy the installation log or
>logs off of the new system onto a flash drive then copy those logs back onto
>another hard drive to send them along but can't do it directly from the newly
>installed system since neither telnet rlogin or ssh got onto it.

Not everybody wants to run servers (even ssh) by default on new
machine installations, so ssh isn't installed *by default*. However,
there is an option in tasksel to install "SSH server" if that's what
you want.

-- 
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com
Google-bait:   http://www.debian.org/CD/free-linux-cd
  Debian does NOT ship free CDs. Please do NOT contact the mailing
  lists asking us to send them to you.

stretch installer question

2016-05-21 Thread Jude DaShiell

Is the package selection section of the stretch installer as broken in all 
versions as it is in the x86_64 version of firmware testing iso?  I 
preserved logs but once installation was finished and system rebooted, ssh 
was nowhere to be found on the new system.  I may be able to copy the 
installation log or logs off of the new system onto a flash drive then 
copy those logs back onto another hard drive to send them along but can't 
do it directly from the newly installed system since neither telnet rlogin 
or ssh got onto it.
Thanks much for adding the firmware-ralink package so I could at least get 
out on the internet while doing an install.




--

Re: Question about custom Debian image

2014-09-09 Thread Cyril Brulebois

Hi Robert,

Robert Yannetta  (2014-09-09):
> Can you tell me whom I need to speak to about getting custom work
> done? I need a custom image of debian-7.6.0-amd64-netinst.iso with
> special Broadcom 57766-A1 ethernet drivers preinstalled. The standard
> image doesn’t even see the ethernet port exists without the drivers
> and I can’t install the driver without the OS already being installed.
> Can’t have one without the other.

back in January I started some work to make it possible to use a newer
kernel on installation image to fix that kind of issues:
  https://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2014/01/msg00407.html

Unfortunately I haven't finished that work since jessie needs to be
worked on as well, and nobody else picked it up as of now.

> I’m willing to pay if it’s possible. Thanks for your time.

Even if the above mentioned work isn't polished yet and suitable for
inclusion into Debian, I should be able to cook something up for your
specific case, and help you debug any issues. I'll follow up on that
through private mail if that's OK with you.

Mraw,
KiBi.


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Question about custom Debian image

2014-09-09 Thread Robert Yannetta

Can you tell me whom I need to speak to about getting custom work done? I need 
a custom image of debian-7.6.0-amd64-netinst.iso with special Broadcom 57766-A1 
ethernet drivers preinstalled. The standard image doesn’t even see the ethernet 
port exists without the drivers and I can’t install the driver without the OS 
already being installed. Can’t have one without the other.

I’m willing to pay if it’s possible. Thanks for your time.

Thanks,
Robert Yannetta

Re: Question for you about IMAC and 5.05 CD iso..

2012-08-22 Thread Rick Thomas

On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:15 PM, P.Carter  wrote:
>
 I have tried 6.05 however it ran very slow it was
> crawling.  And firefox was super slow...
> Imac specs:
> 333-400 mhz  128mb ram  rage 128 video cards,
> 6gb harddrive. slot loader.

It sounds like your problem is the very small RAM on this machine.
Fortunately, you can upgrade it to 512MB (or even 1GB) for less than
$50.  512MB is more than enough to run Debian Squeeze or Wheezy.  I
have a 300MHz blue&white tower with 512MB running Squeeze (6.0.5) that
I'm very happy with.

See the "everymac" web page at
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/imac/specs/imac_350.html
for details.

Check back if you need help with any part of this.

Rick

Rick

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-cd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/CAOnEPfCX=fmft4gzaxmvagsrhhkub1tus3u69ou4j9pufjw...@mail.gmail.com

Question for you about IMAC and 5.05 CD iso..

2012-08-21 Thread P.Carter


Hello,
 
 
I have an older Imac G3 which has 10.3.9 Mac OS X installed.  However rescently 
apple decided to no longer support the older 
version of itunes 7.  I only used the computer for streaming radio stations 
thru itunes for my audio system network. 
 
 
Since this no longer works, I would like to replace MAC OS X with a linux 
version that will work better for this older IMAC and allow me
to stream radio stations again.  I know this is asking alot... but I don't want 
to throw this working computer away when it can stream 
radio with no problems.  
 
>From what I have read on the internet, it appears that debian 5.05 works the 
>best for my IMAC.  However, when I did the netinstall of 5.05 
which is the only version available it was not able to find any FTP mirriors to 
complete the installation.  So given this failed. I'm trying to find
a complete iso. "not a netinstall version of 5.05"  If you could help me this 
would be great. Also, please advise me if there is a better version of 
debian which I can run.  I have tried 6.05 however it ran very slow it was 
crawling.  And firefox was super slow... I have to keep reminding myself
how slow and old this IMAC is... LOL 
 
Imac specs: 
333-400 mhz  128mb ram  rage 128 video cards,
6gb harddrive. slot loader.
 
 
 
Thanks again,
 P.Carter

Re: Updates question

2011-06-29 Thread Steve McIntyre

On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 03:48:49PM +0200, Pontus Andersson wrote:
>Hi.
>
>I have previously downloaded all Debian 6.0.1 DVD's to be used on
>non-internet access computers.
>
>Question 1: To get updates 6.0.2 is it enough to download:
>
>debian-update-6.0.2.1-i386-DVD-1.iso
><http://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/6.0.2.1/i386/iso-dvd/debian-update-6.0.2.1-i386-DVD-1.iso>
>and debian-update-6.0.2.1-i386-DVD-2.iso
><http://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/6.0.2.1/i386/iso-dvd/debian-update-6.0.2.1-i386-DVD-1.iso>
>
>Then mount and install the updates?

Correct. The 6.0.2.1 update DVDs should contain everything needed -
they contain all the packages that were updated between 6.0.0 and
6.0.2.1.

>Question 2: Can I remove, debian-update-6.0.1-i386-DVD-1.iso
><http://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/6.0.2.1/i386/iso-dvd/debian-update-6.0.2.1-i386-DVD-1.iso>
>from my harddrive? Cause this updates are in the new DVD's too right?

Correct. The 6.0.2.1 update DVDs should contain everything needed -
they contain all the packages that were updated between 6.0.0 and
6.0.2.1.

Yes, same answer. :-)

-- 
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com
"This dress doesn't reverse." -- Alden Spiess


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-cd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110629141726.ga21...@einval.com

Re: Question about the version of debian

2011-04-16 Thread Mike Hommey

On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 04:09:45PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Sat, 2011-04-16 at 09:19 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > Le mercredi 13 avril 2011 à 14:02 +0100, Ben Hutchings a écrit : 
> > > On Wed, 2011-04-13 at 20:47 +0800, YANG,Chao wrote:
> > > > dpkg --print-architecture shows
> > > > i386.
> > > > 
> > > > However, uname -a shows
> > > > x86-64
> > > > 
> > > > what does this mean?
> > > 
> > > It means Asias He was right.  And this is a perfectly valid
> > > configuration (though it confuses some third-party installers).
> > > 
> > > But I think this is a bug in the configuration of the CD/DVD creation:
> > > the amd64 flavour is on DVD 1 but the 686-bigmem flavour is on DVD 2.
> > > The latter definitely should be on DVD 1 (and CD 1 or 2, rather than CD
> > > 10!).
> > 
> > How is that a problem? An overwhelming majority of CPUs today are amd64,
> > and even if you choose to install a i386 userland (there are various
> > good reasons for that), you still want an amd64 kernel to benefit of all
> > your CPU can offer.
> 
> There are compatibility issues with third-party scripts that rely on
> 'uname -m' to select which architecture to use in userland.

Is there a compelling reason for init not to set the right personality?

Mike


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-cd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110416152113.ga13...@glandium.org

Re: Question about the version of debian

2011-04-16 Thread Ben Hutchings

On Sat, 2011-04-16 at 09:19 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mercredi 13 avril 2011 à 14:02 +0100, Ben Hutchings a écrit : 
> > On Wed, 2011-04-13 at 20:47 +0800, YANG,Chao wrote:
> > > dpkg --print-architecture shows
> > > i386.
> > > 
> > > However, uname -a shows
> > > x86-64
> > > 
> > > what does this mean?
> > 
> > It means Asias He was right.  And this is a perfectly valid
> > configuration (though it confuses some third-party installers).
> > 
> > But I think this is a bug in the configuration of the CD/DVD creation:
> > the amd64 flavour is on DVD 1 but the 686-bigmem flavour is on DVD 2.
> > The latter definitely should be on DVD 1 (and CD 1 or 2, rather than CD
> > 10!).
> 
> How is that a problem? An overwhelming majority of CPUs today are amd64,
> and even if you choose to install a i386 userland (there are various
> good reasons for that), you still want an amd64 kernel to benefit of all
> your CPU can offer.

There are compatibility issues with third-party scripts that rely on
'uname -m' to select which architecture to use in userland.  And there
are still a few places where 32-bit compatibility wrappers are missing
in the kernel.  Personally, I do use this combination, but I'm not ready
to recommend it in general.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
Once a job is fouled up, anything done to improve it makes it worse.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: Question about the version of debian

2011-04-16 Thread Josselin Mouette

Le mercredi 13 avril 2011 à 14:02 +0100, Ben Hutchings a écrit : 
> On Wed, 2011-04-13 at 20:47 +0800, YANG,Chao wrote:
> > dpkg --print-architecture shows
> > i386.
> > 
> > However, uname -a shows
> > x86-64
> > 
> > what does this mean?
> 
> It means Asias He was right.  And this is a perfectly valid
> configuration (though it confuses some third-party installers).
> 
> But I think this is a bug in the configuration of the CD/DVD creation:
> the amd64 flavour is on DVD 1 but the 686-bigmem flavour is on DVD 2.
> The latter definitely should be on DVD 1 (and CD 1 or 2, rather than CD
> 10!).

How is that a problem? An overwhelming majority of CPUs today are amd64,
and even if you choose to install a i386 userland (there are various
good reasons for that), you still want an amd64 kernel to benefit of all
your CPU can offer.

-- 
 .''`.  Josselin Mouette
: :' :
`. `'  “If you behave this way because you are blackmailed by someone,
  `-[…] I will see what I can do for you.”  -- Jörg Schilling



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: Question about the version of debian

2011-04-13 Thread Ben Hutchings

On Wed, 2011-04-13 at 20:47 +0800, YANG,Chao wrote:
> dpkg --print-architecture shows
> i386.
> 
> However, uname -a shows
> x86-64
> 
> what does this mean?

It means Asias He was right.  And this is a perfectly valid
configuration (though it confuses some third-party installers).

But I think this is a bug in the configuration of the CD/DVD creation:
the amd64 flavour is on DVD 1 but the 686-bigmem flavour is on DVD 2.
The latter definitely should be on DVD 1 (and CD 1 or 2, rather than CD
10!).

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
Once a job is fouled up, anything done to improve it makes it worse.

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

1 2 >

1 - 100 of 152 matches

Mail list logo