Re: stuck on preseed "file may be corrupted"
On Tue, 2005-10-11 at 22:35 -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Matt Price wrote:
> > I wonder if there's full documentation somewhere about how one finds out
> > the options for a d-i preseed variable. For instance, in my preseed I
> > have the line:
> > d-i netcfg/choose_interface select auto
> > ... but actually the network in our classroom is unreliable, and for
> > truly automatic installation I would prefer to use the "Do not configure
> > the network atthis time" option. Should I then replace the above line
> > with :
> >
> > d-i netcfg/choose_interface select Do not configure the
> > network at this time
> > [unwrapped obviously; using evolution here and can't seem to tell it not
> > to wrap this line...]
> >
> > If so, is there some way to find out the relevant options in advance
> > (without just going through an install and noting all the options)
>
> The next release of debconf will include a comment with the available
> choices in debconf-get-selections output.
>
Thanks for the help Joey.
After much incompetent labouring I have a very nicely-automated install
(waits on xorg configuration, but I should be able to fix that). Yay!
Still having trouble changing the package lists (can't get my sig
recognized on the Release file) but I have posted about this on
debian-user and ubuntu-user (seemed less of a debian-installer-specific
problem).
One thing, though: I am installing to small drives and I find they get
filled up with all the .debs in /var/cache/apt/archives/; the
installation then stalls at some point during font cache creation. I
would like to find a way to set the apt preference "clean" from my
preseed file -- can this be one with a normal preseed command
(base-config/apt-setup something)? Or would it be better to do something
like:
base-config/early-command string echo APT::Get::Clean \"true\"\;
>> /etc/apt/apt.conf
the escapes get complicated I guess and it's hard for me to wrap my poor
fuzzy little head around them, but no doubt I could figure it out...
Anyway, thanks once more,
Matt
Reply to: