Your message dated Sun, 1 Sep 2013 19:23:42 +0200 with message-id <201309011924.00219.holger@layer-acht.org> and subject line dealing with old installation-reports has caused the Debian Bug report #701149, regarding Instalation failed: Probably the HD was not recognised 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 this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 701149: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=701149 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
- To: submit@bugs.debian.org
- Subject: Instalation failed: Probably the HD was not recognised
- From: Regid Ichira <regid23@nt1.in>
- Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2013 05:57:18 +0200
- Message-id: <20130222035718.GA1552@nt1.in>
Package: installation-reports Version: 13-Feb-2013 Severity: installation failed. I have syslinux booting xp and memtest86+ on a laptop. syslinux was installed on xp natively. By that I mean that I downloaded syslinux.exe from syslinux site, and used it to install syslinux on xp's ntfs file system. I then downloaded memtest86+, and added an entry in syslinux.cfg for it. So I can boot MS xp, or memtest86+. I want to install debian on the laptop too. I added a debian-installer entry to the existing syslinux.cfg file. That part of the installation worked. I was successful to boot the installer in this way. But I couldn't get the installer initrd to work. I think it has to do with the Ali M5229 PCI Bus Master IDE controller. At least that is what xp is reporting about the hardware. According to xp, the controller has no IRQ settings. The primary and secondary channels are set in xp to IRQ 14 and 15. According to a Google search, that is a normal arrangment with this controller. I tried 4 sets of kernel and initrd: 1. hd-media 2. cdrom: a gtk, and plain versions. 3. netboot. I think all of them were downloaded from http.us.debian.org/debian/dists/wheezy/main/installer-i386/current/images/ , and the version is of 13-Feb-2013, but I am not sure of that. It could be a later version by a few days at most. 1. hd-media With this pair of kernel and initrd, the machine got rebooted by itself almost as soon as syslinux got the initrd, or is it the kernel, running. By experience with xp I know that the machine reboots itself if it senses that there is a problem to boot the HD. 2. netboot With this pair of kernel and initrd, I got a kernel panic. Before the panic details, I could see that List of all partitions: No file system could be mount root, tried: That is why I think there was a problem to recognise the Ali M5229 controller. The boot messages up to the kernel panic were running too fast to be able to see if the controller was recognised. Perhaps you should allow a CONFIG_BOOT_DELAY, or something similar? Due to the kernel panic, I had to reboot with the appropriate sysrq combination. 3. cdrom The results with a plain cdrom kernel + initrd were similar to that of the netboot kernel + initrd. With the gtk version, I got what seem to be an infinite loop. I couldn't see the details. It does seem that each iteration in the loop ended with an error message about something related to x.org configuration file. Does that make sense? Since there was no kernel panic, I could reboot using the alt+ctrl+delete combination. Two final comments: 1. I think it is a good thing that sysrq is working. I think it is not documented in the installation manual. It should be. It could help non developers too. And also introduce them to a useful feature of the system. For me, I would otherwise need to reboot my laptop the hard way. 2. Pehaps the ability to boot with syslinux should be mentioned in the installation manual?
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
- To: 692338-done@bugs.debian.org, 703176-done@bugs.debian.org, 702959-done@bugs.debian.org, 702774-done@bugs.debian.org, 702098-done@bugs.debian.org, 701862-done@bugs.debian.org, 701676-done@bugs.debian.org, 701493-done@bugs.debian.org, 701493-done@bugs.debian.org, 701149-done@bugs.debian.org, 700974-done@bugs.debian.org, 700688-done@bugs.debian.org, 700637-done@bugs.debian.org, 700598-done@bugs.debian.org, 703648-done@bugs.debian.org, 701545-done@bugs.debian.org, 703626-done@bugs.debian.org
- Subject: dealing with old installation-reports
- From: Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org>
- Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2013 19:23:42 +0200
- Message-id: <201309011924.00219.holger@layer-acht.org>
Hi, thank you for submitting installation reports, much appreciated. I read through all the bugs mentioned here (and I'm sure they were read by several people at the time they were submitted) and am closing them now as/if - they (finally) indicated success and/or - I know from first hand experience that the functionality is working in Wheezy and/or - they only contained very little information and/or - they contained user errors and/or - they were caused by broken hardware and/or - they have been from a development phase where things were not stable and/or - they are quite old (and thus likely fixed today) and/or - moreinfo was asked and not given or - they are wishlist but rather special + exotic and not have been acted on for years. (See http://blog.liw.fi/posts/wishlist-bugs/ why it's often useful to close wishlist bugs.) If I've closed a bug incorrectly please do reply (it's easy to reopen and I'll do if requested) or just file a new one - thats often better, as the bug log will be clearer and shorter and not contain cruft. cheers, HolgerAttachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
--- End Message ---