Hello,
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 2:47 AM, Christian PERRIER bubu...@debian.org wrote:
Quoting Paul Wise (p...@debian.org):
Hi all,
Would it be possible to unblock busybox? It has been waiting for 117
days with no RC bugs. If it is not unblocked then there will be no
udhcpc/udhcpc packages in
[Pauli Manninen]
Intel 82578DM network card is not recognized by Squeeze d-i.
Motherboard: Zotac H55ITX-A-E
The card works just fine in Sid though getting it tested required
Debian installation on the disk in a different system followed by
some post-installation disk swapping =)
Which
* Petter Reinholdtsen p...@hungry.com [2010-06-19 19:38]:
When Debian Edu set up its thin client server, the installer reuse the
APT cache by bind-mounting /var/cache/apt/archives into the chroot to
avoid having to download the same packages again when creating the
LTSP chroot. Because of
* Frans Pop elen...@planet.nl [2010-06-20 07:17]:
cleanup () {
+ rm -f /target/var/cache/apt/archives/*.deb 2/dev/null || true
rm -f $KERNEL_LIST $KERNEL_LIST.unfiltered
}
Shouldn't this call 'apt-get cleanup' in /target instead?
Yeah, I was wondering about that too. I
* Otavio Salvador ota...@ossystems.com.br [2010-06-19 12:35]:
The following patch, which clears the cache after debootstrap and then
again at the end (after kernel/extra packages), works for me. OK to
apply?
Conceptually it is OK but why not move it to post-base-installer.d?
Well, my
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
* Otavio Salvador ota...@ossystems.com.br [2010-06-19 12:35]:
The following patch, which clears the cache after debootstrap and
then again at the end (after kernel/extra packages), works for me.
OK to apply?
Conceptually it is OK but
* Petter Reinholdtsen p...@hungry.com [2010-06-20 12:05]:
Is it a major problem to wait until finish-install to clear the cache?
Yes, when you have only 512 MB of storage, those 70-80 MB of debs that
are downloaded during base install really hurt.
--
Martin Michlmayr
http://www.cyrius.com/
[Martin Michlmayr]
Would it be a major problem simply to use a web proxy instead? (Just
curious).
For some sites, yes. :)
For others, no.
We do provide a squid proxy already as part of Debian Edu, but as this
reuse of the apt cache is an optimization, it should be fairly obvious
that it is a
On Saturday 19 June 2010, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
I see no reason for leaving .deb files in /var/cache/apt/archives on a
fresh installation, so let's run apt-get clean before reboot.
This has been suggested and discussed before. IIRC (but I may be mistaken)
Joey has always been against it.
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Frans Pop wrote:
The main reason IIRC is that leaving the packages makes it unnecessary
to download them again if part of e.g. tasksel fails for whatever reason
and the user has to install some packages manually [...].
Note that the above argument is only really valid
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Frans Pop wrote:
Any disk space savings are IMO illusionary as the cache will fill up
again anyway during later updates and any system that does not have
sufficient disk space to hold a decent package cache will also have
serious problems during later stable updates.
I
Quoting Frans Pop (elen...@planet.nl):
The main reason IIRC is that leaving the packages makes it unnecessary to
download them again if part of e.g. tasksel fails for whatever reason and
the user has to install some packages manually (after ignoring that
error - which is a real option as
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 6:37 AM, Martin Michlmayr t...@cyrius.com wrote:
* Otavio Salvador ota...@ossystems.com.br [2010-06-19 12:35]:
The following patch, which clears the cache after debootstrap and then
again at the end (after kernel/extra packages), works for me. OK to
apply?
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Christian PERRIER wrote:
Maybe, for more corner cases where keepign the cache would be
good, could we have a low priority option (or a preseed-only choice)
to *not* clean the cache?
I don't think it has anything to do with user choice or preseeding. Making
this a
Accepted:
partman-btrfs_1.dsc
to main/p/partman-btrfs/partman-btrfs_1.dsc
partman-btrfs_1.tar.gz
to main/p/partman-btrfs/partman-btrfs_1.tar.gz
partman-btrfs_1_all.udeb
to main/p/partman-btrfs/partman-btrfs_1_all.udeb
Override entries for your package:
partman-btrfs_1.dsc - standard
Accepted:
partman-btrfs_2.dsc
to main/p/partman-btrfs/partman-btrfs_2.dsc
partman-btrfs_2.tar.gz
to main/p/partman-btrfs/partman-btrfs_2.tar.gz
partman-btrfs_2_all.udeb
to main/p/partman-btrfs/partman-btrfs_2_all.udeb
Override entries for your package:
partman-btrfs_2.dsc - standard
On Sun, 2010-06-20 at 04:23 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 2:47 AM, Christian PERRIER bubu...@debian.org wrote:
Quoting Paul Wise (p...@debian.org):
Hi all,
Would it be possible to unblock busybox? It has been waiting for 117
days with no RC bugs. If it is not
On Jun 20, 2010, at 6:06 AM, Frans Pop wrote:
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
* Otavio Salvador ota...@ossystems.com.br [2010-06-19 12:35]:
The following patch, which clears the cache after debootstrap and
then again at the end (after kernel/extra packages), works for me.
OK
[Frans Pop]
The only reason I see to keep the cache is when some packages (after
base-installer) fail to install. If we want to cover that case it should
be detected automatically by testing the result of tasksel [1]. The final
cleanup could be omitted in that case.
Sound like a good
[Otavio Salvador]
It looks it will need to be optional otherwise this is going to break
Debian EDU.
But I see your point in doing it twice :)
One setup that would not break Debian Edu is to clean the apt cache
once just after debootstrap, as bind-mounting the apt cache is only
done after
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Rick Thomas wrote:
If you are *very* short of disk space, doing it twice might make sense.
Nonsense. If you're that short on diskspace you have a totally unusable
system anyway.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
[1] Checking installation of packages using apt-install is much
harder to do as there are many different calls and failure may be
expected in some cases. It also gains much less as their total size
is much less.
I believe it would not be
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
reassign 586555 installation-reports
Bug #586555 [debian 5.0 cd] Difficulty installing and using Debian
Warning: Unknown package 'debian'
Warning: Unknown package '5.0'
Warning: Unknown package 'cd'
Bug reassigned from package 'debian 5.0 cd' to
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 12:13 PM, Petter Reinholdtsen p...@hungry.comwrote:
Which kernel module is providing the driver for this network card in
sid?
Can be found in the lspci output. Anyways, it is e1000e =)
- Miyo
Hello Frans,
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 11:21 AM, Frans Pop elen...@planet.nl wrote:
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Rick Thomas wrote:
If you are *very* short of disk space, doing it twice might make sense.
Nonsense. If you're that short on diskspace you have a totally unusable
system anyway.
Not
Hello,
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 10:54 AM, Petter Reinholdtsen p...@hungry.com wrote:
One setup that would not break Debian Edu is to clean the apt cache
once just after debootstrap, as bind-mounting the apt cache is only
done after debootstrap is done when building the LTSP chroot. The
reason
Hello,
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 10:41 AM, Petter Reinholdtsen p...@hungry.com wrote:
[Frans Pop]
The only reason I see to keep the cache is when some packages (after
base-installer) fail to install. If we want to cover that case it should
be detected automatically by testing the result of
Hello,
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 12:57 PM, Miyo m...@iki.fi wrote:
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 12:13 PM, Petter Reinholdtsen p...@hungry.com
wrote:
Which kernel module is providing the driver for this network card in
sid?
Can be found in the lspci output. Anyways, it is e1000e =)
Did you try
Did not work with this one,
Jun 19 22:45 firmware-testing-amd64-netinst.iso
Is recently more recent?
- Miyo
Indeed it makes a difference. Network detected with latest daily. So it was
just the snapshot from previous night that was not yet enough.
I'll proceed with the installation, and hopefully can a bit later report a
succesful installation =)
- Miyo
[Otavio Salvador]
So it being done at base-installer time would not hurt you, indeed.
Yes, assuming it is done right after debootstrap, and before the extra
packages (like the kernel) is done. The extra packages will be useful
to cache for the LTSP chroot building.
Then basically it could be
Package: tasksel
Version: N/A
Severity: wishlist
Tags: l10n patch
Please find attached the Indonesian updated translation of the tasksel package.
tasksel_id.tgz
Description: application/compressed-tar
32 matches
Mail list logo
