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

Re: trying simple-cdd



On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 11:39:10PM -0500, lloyd@paisite.com wrote:
> ./build-simple-cdd --profiles test --local-packages
> $(pwd)/../simple-cdd-profiles_0.3.0~1_all.udeb --mirror-tools "reprepro
> wget"
> 
> We seem to be making progress, but still issues. Not sure whether the
> problems are my fumbles or your end.

i think neither... more below

> build-simple-cdd seems to go through it's full cycle, but returns with
> several errors and a warning. And, I see no evidence of *.raw file.
 
> -- http://ftp.us.debian.org/robots.txt: Error 404: Not Found
> -- a whole bunch of "Last-modified header missing" messages... seem to be
> a bunch of */doc and *doc/FAQ files
> -- WARNING: missing optional packages from profile.default:
> localization.config
> --ls: ~/etch-simple-cdd/tmp//etch-i386/?? No such file or directory

the above messages should be nothing to worry about.

> -- ERROR: package installation-guide -i386 not found

not sure what that's about. probably not fatal.

> --ERROR: Unable to read UDEB EXCLUDE file...

never had this cause a problem.

> -- WARNING: missing optional packages from profile.default:
> localization.config
> -- ERROR: missing required packages from profile test: xorg

ok, so what it looks like to me is that reprepro sucessfully downloaded
the xorg package, but possibly there are unsatisfied dependencies for
xorg, so debian-cd is not including it. you might see messages about
unsatisfied dependencies for xorg if you look over the extensive
output... (one of these days, i'll get proper log file support for
build-simple-cdd)

it looks like the new xorg and xserver-xorg that just hit etch changed
the dependencies considerably in the last couple days, moving many
things that were once dependencies to recommends. gah.

so, if you add to test.downloads:

xserver-xorg-video-all
xserver-xorg-input-all

it should work.

as a side note, i suspect this breaks ltsp packages too :(

live well,
  vagrant



Reply to: