[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#28308: marked as done (dinstall fails to work with "proprietary cdrom")



Your message dated Fri, 21 May 1999 00:29:09 +0200
with message-id <19990521002908.B6589@finlandia.infodrom.north.de>
and subject line fixed
has caused the attached bug report to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I'm
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Ian Jackson
(administrator, Debian bugs database)

Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 21 Oct 1998 10:29:51 +0000
Received: (qmail 16406 invoked from network); 21 Oct 1998 10:29:50 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO swszl.szkp.uni-miskolc.hu) (gabor@193.6.2.24)
  by master.debian.org with SMTP; 21 Oct 1998 10:29:50 -0000
Received: from localhost (gabor@localhost)
	by swszl.szkp.uni-miskolc.hu (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id MAA31832
	for <submit@bugs.debian.org>; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 12:37:30 +0200
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 12:37:30 +0200 (CEST)
From: Vitez Gabor <gabor@swszl.szkp.uni-miskolc.hu>
X-Sender: gabor@swszl
To: submit@bugs.debian.org
Subject: dinstall fails to work with "proprietary cdrom"
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.96.981021121654.31651C-100000@swszl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

Package: dinstall
Version: 2.0(?)

dinstall in Debian 2.0 fails to work proprietary cdroms, when it should
install the "Operating system kernel and modules". When selecting
proprietary cdrom it will ask for the drvxxxx.bin file, but fails to read
it from a floppy disk. It will simply take you back to the start of the
installation procedure. Copying drvxxxx.bin to the hdd, and using the
appropriate method, we could work-around this problem.
The bug was repeatable on multiple systems.

	yours:
		Gabor Vitez


Reply to: