Re: INIT problems continue
> > It is *not* clear.
> Ok, where are you stuck?
> P: Configuring package apt
> E: Couldn't install root!
That looks pretty serious, no?
> Now thats something new. Something broke.
There are two problems. If you do debootstrap --verbose you can see it.
It's complaining about /etc/modules.conf existing (which you can fix by
rm'ing it and re-running debootstrap), and also about the perl version
problem (which didn't have an apparent fix).
> But lets keep going. The
> essential packages are installed and configured and the chroot should
> be functional.
Silly me. I stopped at the apparently fatal error.
> It seems someone changed the sarge packages files or some debs
> (possibly me) and broke things slightly. But I don't see the problems
> you mentioned.
The "Couldn't install root!" *is* the problem I mentioned.
> > Anyway, the FAQ says:
> > you need to setup a debian woody i386 [...] see the Debian Reference
> > Manual 8.6.33 or the (c)debootstrap documentation [...] add "deb
> > http://debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org/ sarge main" to your
> > /etc/apt/sources.list'
> > If you think that's a clear instruction not to use debootstrap or to
> At that stage debootstrap is fine. It can handle i386.
So why were you calling it crap?
> > avoid sarge, I'd hate to hear what you think is unclear and confusing.
> It says "debian woody i386".
And it tells you to set sarge in your sources list in the same paragraph.
An unusual thing to do, without even a word about it?
> > It reads like an old document that's been carelessly updated.
> Anyway, thats from
> "The first 64-bit kernel"
> "Installing the biarch toolchain on a i386 chroot"
Yes, that's precisely what I was trying to do.
> from the mail I thought you already have such a kernel.
I did, but I was having trouble with stabililty. I wanted to start
from scratch, so I went back to the beginning and wanted to get an
i386 chroot with the binarch tools to cross compile an amd64 kernel.
I wiped my old chroots and went back to the i386 kernel and began
> If not its
> way easier to create a .config and ask on irc or on the ML to get it
> compiled by someone else (as suggested in the FAQ as fallback).
I'm not a mamby pampy user who needs someone else to compile a kernel
> started with a 64bit kernel preinstalled so i never had to do that
Good for you.
> The docs are from old texts and hear say of other people.
> Personally I'm to lazy to switch back to a 32bit kernel to check and
> update those informations,
Yes, I can tell. That's what I meant by "It reads like an old document
that's been carelessly updated."
Personally, I don't care if you're too lazy to test it or not. You
can do with your time as you please. But when a user questions these
sections, you shouldn't shout a RTFM at them if you don't even trust
Especially if you're not even following the conversation well enough
to know what sections we're talking about.
> The part of the FAQ you want to read again is:
> "Creating a 32/64 bit chroot environment (optional)"
No, I don't need to read the FAQ again.