problem

hey this is kalyan. presently im working on live-build actually i got my final output of binary-hybrid.iso during installation in the stage of partitioning i'm not get the option of ext3 or ext4 file system format, but im only getting xfs and jfs file formats. whats the problems can anyone help

Bug#666393: Debian Testing Install Successful

Package: installation-reports Boot method: Image version: Date: Machine: < Asustek K53-E Laptop > Processor:Intel Core i5 Memory: 6 GB Partitions:

Bug#666399: s390-dasd fails to work with >20 devices visible (mostly in LPAR mode)

Package: s390-dasd Version: 0.0.27 Severity: important s390-dasd has the following code snippet in dasd-config.c: | static enum state_wanted get_channel (void) | { | if (di_tree_size (channels) > 20) | return get_channel_input (); | else if (di_tree_size (channels)

Processing of partman-partitioning_85_i386.changes

partman-partitioning_85_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: partman-partitioning_85.dsc partman-partitioning_85.tar.gz partman-partitioning_85_i386.udeb Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon (running on host franck.debian.org) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, em

partman-partitioning_85_i386.changes ACCEPTED into unstable

Accepted: partman-partitioning_85.dsc to main/p/partman-partitioning/partman-partitioning_85.dsc partman-partitioning_85.tar.gz to main/p/partman-partitioning/partman-partitioning_85.tar.gz partman-partitioning_85_i386.udeb to main/p/partman-partitioning/partman-partitioning_85_i386.udeb

Bug#666424: task-lxde-desktop: please include a webbrowser

Package: task-lxde-desktop Severity: wishlist I have just did a test installation of debian wheezy/testing. During installation, I didn't choose any x packages to be installed. After installation, I installed the package xdm for a graphical login manager and then the lxde meta package. Everything

debconf not recognizing template pattern from custom udeb

I'm trying to setup and run the scripted partitioning udeb I found on the list a while back (http://hezmatt.org/~mpalmer/scripted-partitioning/). I've got the vast majority of it all working, just for some reason whatever pattern I preseed, debconf always reports the pattern as NULL. Which th

Processing of partman-auto-lvm_42_i386.changes

partman-auto-lvm_42_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: partman-auto-lvm_42.dsc partman-auto-lvm_42.tar.gz partman-auto-lvm_42_all.udeb Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon (running on host franck.debian.org) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boo

partman-auto-lvm_42_i386.changes ACCEPTED into unstable

Accepted: partman-auto-lvm_42.dsc to main/p/partman-auto-lvm/partman-auto-lvm_42.dsc partman-auto-lvm_42.tar.gz to main/p/partman-auto-lvm/partman-auto-lvm_42.tar.gz partman-auto-lvm_42_all.udeb to main/p/partman-auto-lvm/partman-auto-lvm_42_all.udeb Changes: partman-auto-lvm (42) unstab

Bug#610377: marked as done (partman-auto-lvm does not allow all filesystems to be LVM volumes, even with grub2 as default boot loader)

Your message dated Fri, 30 Mar 2012 17:21:51 + with message-id and subject line Bug#610377: fixed in partman-auto-lvm 42 has caused the Debian Bug report #610377, regarding partman-auto-lvm does not allow all filesystems to be LVM volumes, even with grub2 as default boot loader to be marked a

Bug#639445: Patch for the 2.1.2-5.2 NMU of discover

Dear maintainer of discover, On Wednesday, March 21, 2012 I sent you a notice announcing my intent to upload an NMU of your package to fix its pending l10n issues, after an initial notice sent on Friday, March 16, 2012. You either agreed for this NMU or did not respond to my notices. I will no

Processing of discover_2.1.2-5.2_i386.changes

discover_2.1.2-5.2_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: discover_2.1.2-5.2.dsc discover_2.1.2.orig.tar.gz discover_2.1.2-5.2.diff.gz discover_2.1.2-5.2_i386.deb libdiscover2_2.1.2-5.2_i386.deb libdiscover-dev_2.1.2-5.2_i386.deb Greetings, Your

Bug#665638: prevent debootstrap vom needing SHA256sums

On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 05:35:36PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > > Mario Koppensteiner wrote: > Am I correct in deducing that this mirror is one that was actually > generated with apt-move, and that's why it's missing the SHA256 fields? Yes, you are correct. > > Can somebody please implement a para