On 09/06/2017 05:21 PM, Fedor Konstantinov wrote:
I'm creating mirrored system disk.
For example I make partitions on two disks like the following:
1. 500MB for /boot - boot partition
2. 2GB for swap - swap
3. Whole disk - sun's whole disk
4. 31,6GB for / - rest for the root fs
Then I create
Hey Adrian,
from the old, golden sparc days:
On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 04:59:44PM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> On 09/06/2017 04:40 PM, Fedor Konstantinov wrote:
> > I would greatly appreciate if it could be possible to add to the installer
> > ability to
> > select mdadm metadata
I'm creating mirrored system disk.
For example I make partitions on two disks like the following:
1. 500MB for /boot - boot partition
2. 2GB for swap - swap
3. Whole disk - sun's whole disk
4. 31,6GB for / - rest for the root fs
Then I create metadevices (mirrors) for partitions 1,2 and 4.
We
On 09/06/2017 04:40 PM, Fedor Konstantinov wrote:
I would greatly appreciate if it could be possible to add to the installer
ability to
select mdadm metadata version when creating RAID arrays. Now, when creating
mirror for
/boot partition (at sun disk slice 0) installer uses v1.2 metadata and
Hi, list
I would greatly appreciate if it could be possible to add to the
installer ability to select mdadm metadata version when creating RAID
arrays.
Now, when creating mirror for /boot partition (at sun disk slice 0)
installer uses v1.2 metadata and so it corrupts sun disklabel.
To avoid
On 09/06/2017 03:00 PM, Frank Scheiner wrote:
I can confirm this. But at least the boot loader can now be installed from
rescue mode as silo gets installed in the target root FS.
I tested the default installation, which went through as before without an
issue - apart from the missing boot
On 09/06/2017 12:22 PM, James Clarke wrote:
I only made a couple of minor changes; the edit you want is [0] by Alex
McWhirter.
James
[0] https://wiki.debian.org/Sparc64?action=diff=25=26
Thanks for the pointer, I'll contact him directly.
On 09/06/2017 12:36 PM, Fedor Konstantinov wrote:
Hi,
there's no "Install SILO boot loader" option in the installer menu in
the latest (06.09.2017) debian-9.0-sparc64-NETINST-1.iso image. Despite
of that SILO is installed.
Regards,
Fedor
I can confirm this. But at least the boot loader
On 09/06/2017 12:36 PM, Fedor Konstantinov wrote:
there's no "Install SILO boot loader" option in the installer menu in the
latest (06.09.2017) debian-9.0-sparc64-NETINST-1.iso image. Despite of that
SILO is installed.
Thanks for the heads-up. I will look into this issue. I'm still ironing
out
Hi,
there's no "Install SILO boot loader" option in the installer menu in
the latest (06.09.2017) debian-9.0-sparc64-NETINST-1.iso image. Despite
of that SILO is installed.
Regards,
Fedor
Перенаправленное сообщение
Тема: Re: Latest Debian SPARC64 ISO Image
Дата: Wed,
On 6 Sep 2017, at 11:27, Frank Scheiner wrote:
> On 09/06/2017 09:37 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
>> [...]
>> FWIW, I have found the issue and the new images are ready. I'm currently
>> waiting to get write permissions to upload them here:
>>>
On 09/06/2017 09:37 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
[...]
FWIW, I have found the issue and the new images are ready. I'm currently
waiting to get write permissions to upload them here:
https://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/ports/
Thanks, I already grabbed a copy for testing.
[...]
I
On 09/04/2017 05:29 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> There is one talk about a SPARC emulator for x86, multiple talks about putting
> your stuff into Oracle's SPARC cloud, i.e. on actual SPARC hardware.
>
> And companies trying to push you into the cloud is not Oracle-specific and
> also
>
Hi!
I am cross-posting this to debian-ports@l.d.o because it affects all
Debian Ports architectures.
As of today, we will be using Debian's official cdimage mirror to host
the installation images for Debian Ports, the images can be found in [1].
I have uploaded images for hppa, m68k, ppc64 and
On 09/06/2017 08:40 AM, Frank Scheiner wrote:
>> For some reason the CD building process is omitting several packages
>> that should be included. I have not yet figured out what the problem
>> is. Still investigating.
>
> Many thanks for your hard work on this.
FWIW, I have found the issue and
Hi,
On 09/05/2017 10:21 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
[...]
For some reason the CD building process is omitting several packages
that should be included. I have not yet figured out what the problem
is. Still investigating.
Many thanks for your hard work on this.
In the meantime I
16 matches
Mail list logo