New 1.3 installation report

1997-06-12 Thread Steve McIntyre
I was involved in a complete new installation of a 1.3 machine yesterday, showing the college's computer officer how good Linux and Debian can be. I'm very glad to report there were _no_ problems whatsoever on the way through the installation. We now have a machine up and running with DNS servic

Re: 1.3 installation report

1997-06-08 Thread Kai Henningsen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andy Mortimer) wrote on 08.06.97 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Jun 8, Kai Henningsen wrote > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Perens) wrote on 03.06.97 in > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: [dselect fails to install main > > > packages depending on ones in non-free or contrib] > > > > W

Re: 1.3 installation report

1997-06-08 Thread Andy Mortimer
On Jun 8, Kai Henningsen wrote > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Perens) wrote on 03.06.97 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > [dselect fails to install main packages depending on ones in non-free > > or contrib] > > Well, this is one thing that dpkg-mountable seems to get right. Maybe > other installation

Re: 1.3 installation report

1997-06-08 Thread Kai Henningsen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Perens) wrote on 03.06.97 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I wound up in a catch-22 with some of the extra packages: > - ghostview and gv both depend on gs. However, package gs-alladin which > provides gs never gets installed because dselect tries to: gs-alladin is > in non-free

Re: 1.3 installation report

1997-06-04 Thread John Goerzen
Andreas Jellinghaus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > i'm missing the same thing: debian should have a database with error > reports and how to fix them. every big bug should be documented (we had > this bud , and you can solve it this way : . it's > also fixed in the new release debian and in the pa

Re: 1.3 installation report

1997-06-04 Thread Mark Eichin
correct analysis except: > As it happens xdm-shadow works fine on non-shadow systems, so I believe the > maintainer has (or is about to) uploaded a copy where xdm and xdm-shadow are > the same (shadow enabled) binary. Not uploaded yet -- it's just one of the things I'll be sure the 3.3 upload g

Re: 1.3 installation report

1997-06-04 Thread Tim Sailer
In your email to me, Andreas Jellinghaus, you wrote: > > On Jun 3, Jim Pick wrote > > This flaw needs to be publicized a bit more. I'm sure I would have > > figured out the problem via the bug system eventually - but I shouldn't > > have to do that. > > > > Is there a document where "Errata" ca

Re: 1.3 installation report

1997-06-04 Thread Andreas Jellinghaus
On Jun 3, Jim Pick wrote > This flaw needs to be publicized a bit more. I'm sure I would have > figured out the problem via the bug system eventually - but I shouldn't > have to do that. > > Is there a document where "Errata" can go? How about a release-specific > FAQ that we can update after

Re: 1.3 installation report

1997-06-04 Thread Philip Hands
> > The fix is very simple: ctrl-alt-F1; log in as root; shadowconfig off; > > return to x and log in normally. But you do have to know this.. and there > > is no warning when installing shadow or xdm. > > Arrrghhh! > > I spent two hours yesterday (past midnite) on the phone with a client > try

Re: 1.3 installation report

1997-06-04 Thread Mark Eichin
and don't forget, there's *still* no written-down policy on shadow: % grep -i shadow /usr/doc/dpkg/programmer.html/* Exit 1 I mean, I will get this straightened out with 3.3, but the picky-detail side of me is still miffed that debian's shadow policy is still basically hearsay. :-} -- TO UNSUBS

Re: 1.3 installation report

1997-06-04 Thread Mark Eichin
> The xserver packages want to setup x, this gets stuck because xinitrc is > missing because it is part of xbase - which is not installed at that Hmm. Yeah, I think I've probably always won because I use dpkg from the shell, and with globbing get everything in alphabetical order :-) The problem

Re: 1.3 installation report

1997-06-04 Thread Jim Pick
> I did find a serious problem after rebooting (ok, I could probably have > done this more subtle) the machine to start xdm. From reading several > debian related lists I already knew that xdm will break with shadow > passwords. However, I doubt if everyone who just installed debian 1.3 will > rea

1.3 installation report

1997-06-04 Thread Bruce Perens
From: "J.P.D. Kooij" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> On Mon, 2 Jun 1997, Bruce Perens wrote: > We are in the process of releasing Debian 1.3 . Tonight I made another attempt to install base + 300 packages. I've added the list to the end of this message. I experienced a _major_ problem with shadow and xdm,

Re: xdm-shadow (was Re: 1.3 installation report.)

1997-05-30 Thread Mark Eichin
> # mv /usr/X11R6/bin/xdm-shadow /usr/X11R6/bin/xdm > I can switch back and forth between shadow and non-shadow passwords, > and can login via xdm just fine. Nothing bad happened, my machine > hasn't exploded yet, etc. :-) Ah, I see, it just logs an error, but doesn't actually fail. (The code on

xdm-shadow (was Re: 1.3 installation report.)

1997-05-30 Thread Marek Michalkiewicz
Hi, Mark Eichin: > 2) the xdm shadow support doesn't fall back in any sane way, > and it's more than just dropping a check -- a bunch of code needs > rearrangement. (If you run xdm-shadow on a non-shadow system, you *lose*...) Well, I just did that with xbase-3.2-6: # mv /usr/X11R6/bin/xdm

Re: 1.3 installation report.

1997-05-22 Thread Mark Eichin
nope, recent versions of xbase aren't any better about shadow support, because 1) there's nothing in the programmers guide even mentioning it 2) the xdm shadow support doesn't fall back in any sane way, and it's more than just dropping a check -- a bunch of code needs rearrangement.

Re: 1.3 installation report.

1997-05-21 Thread Thomas Gebhardt
Hi, > Presumably, you installed xdm after installing shadow. shadowconfig edits > /etc/init.d/xdm to switch between using xdm and xdm-shadow, so all you need > to > do is: > > shadowconfig off > shadowconfig on > > and all should be well. Yes, thank you! But I think, the xbase package

Re: 1.3 installation report.

1997-05-20 Thread Philip Hands
> Hi, > > > 2. I installed shadowing as it suggested - started installing packages > > merrily. I also installed and configured NIS - however, I cannot log in > > any in my personal account - though I can finger anyone without trouble. I > > deinstalled shadow by doing a shadowconfig off and tha

Re: 1.3 installation report.

1997-05-20 Thread Karl Ferguson
At 09:26 AM 19/05/97 +0100, Philip Hands wrote: >> 2. I installed shadowing as it suggested - started installing packages >> merrily. I also installed and configured NIS - however, I cannot log in >> any in my personal account - though I can finger anyone without trouble. I >> deinstalled shadow

Re: 1.3 installation report.

1997-05-20 Thread Thomas Gebhardt
Hi, > 2. I installed shadowing as it suggested - started installing packages > merrily. I also installed and configured NIS - however, I cannot log in > any in my personal account - though I can finger anyone without trouble. I > deinstalled shadow by doing a shadowconfig off and that still didn

Re: 1.3 installation report.

1997-05-19 Thread Philip Hands
> 2. I installed shadowing as it suggested - started installing packages > merrily. I also installed and configured NIS - however, I cannot log in > any in my personal account - though I can finger anyone without trouble. I > deinstalled shadow by doing a shadowconfig off and that still didn't fi

Re: 1.3 installation report.

1997-05-19 Thread Karl Ferguson
At 10:07 PM 18/05/97 -0500, Guy Maor wrote: >But is the last line in the file? Certainly is. I just saw someone post on a 'login' bug that they couldn't log in as anyone except for root because of the passwd file being mode 600 - this isn't the case for me. the daemon.log reports this: May 19 1

Re: 1.3 installation report.

1997-05-19 Thread Guy Maor
Karl Ferguson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > At 02:09 PM 18/05/97 -0500, Guy Maor wrote: > >This might be because the + entry is not at the end? (5634, 8734) I > >plan to release a new passwd package today which fixes this. > > I'm pretty sure I tried putting +:: in both /etc/passwd and /etc/s

Re: 1.3 installation report.

1997-05-19 Thread Karl Ferguson
At 02:09 PM 18/05/97 -0500, Guy Maor wrote: >This might be because the + entry is not at the end? (5634, 8734) I >plan to release a new passwd package today which fixes this. I'm pretty sure I tried putting +:: in both /etc/passwd and /etc/shadow - still no success there I think. -- Karl Ferg

Re: 1.3 installation report.

1997-05-18 Thread Sven Rudolph
Karl Ferguson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 1. After completing the badblocks scan when 'initalizing' a hard disk, it > starts writing the tables - I get "Could not get a free page..." error come > up - however the format finishes and the partition seems fine and usable. This is a kernel problem,

Re: 1.3 installation report.

1997-05-18 Thread Guy Maor
Karl Ferguson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 2. I installed shadowing as it suggested - started installing packages > merrily. I also installed and configured NIS - however, I cannot log in > any in my personal account - though I can finger anyone without trouble. I > deinstalled shadow by doing

1.3 installation report.

1997-05-18 Thread Karl Ferguson
Hi Guys. I just tested the new 1.3 disks and the system seems great. Of course, there are some little qwerks which I'm not sure if they're related to my hardware or not. They are: 1. After completing the badblocks scan when 'initalizing' a hard disk, it starts writing the tables - I get "Could