Full install from cd achieved (RFC)
Hi!
Yesterday I made my first complete install of debian woody using the new
boot floppies, well, my customiced version of them, so, I'd like you to
comment the changes I have done fot achieving this and if you agree with
them I'll do my first commit to our cvs.
Well, I have done this on a galician (gl translation thanks to Jacobo Tarrío)
install, so I have also taken care about some LANG things wich allowed me to
make a full galician install, I'd like your comments about this hacks also.
First of all, I have used some things from unstable to achieve this, I have
made my local woody Packages files and cds have modutils 2.4.5-2, dpkg 1.9.4
and debconf 0.9.40. Of this only debconf is really needed (thanks for fixing
that lock bug, it really works now), but the others help it a bit.
I have also not used busybox on testing or unstable but rather a cvs version
that I compiled for this, as both busybox on testing and unstable are quite
buggy, let's see if we can see a new busybox package in the near future :-)
RFC 1 (termwrap):
I have used termwrap, rescued it from our scripts/basedisks/Attic, I have
asked before about this and I ask again now, termwrap is called on our
inittab for the installation second step, but it is not on current
boot-floppies, it was moved to the attic by aph with this reason:
remove this cruft; anything that needs to get into base needs to be
added to debootstrap pkg, not here
Well, I don't know if aph has filled a bug on this already against
debootstrap, but debootstrap still doesn't install this file :-(
What do we do about this?
RFC 2 (debootstrap):
I have made some additions to the woody script here, only one removal.
I have removed fdutils because the interactive setup it has was breaking the
install, as aj had noticed when building debootstrap 0.1.7, has anybody
noticed the maintainer about this? shall I do it?
aj: I have noticed you have added libpcre2 to be installed, why this? I
didn't see anything making it necesary :-?
The things I have added on woody script so that it install all needed parts
are:
locales, perl, perl-modules, adduser and base-config
base-config is required to make the final step of the install.
adduser is required by base-config, even though there is not deppend on it.
perl is required by adduser.
perl-modules is required by perl.
locales is required if we want i18n support.
This is a patch I have made for the locales support, what I do is at the
beginning put LANG as C so that no error messages about locales are shown on
console 4, then when locales are installed if the LANG of the install or the
one chosen on the Language Chooser is different from C I do a locale-gen
including the LANG that has been selected and set LANG back to that value
now that we have that locale compiled.
Please comment on this if you see any problem with it.
--- woody.orig Tue May 1 09:47:26 2001
+++ woody.patch Sat May 5 15:08:22 2001
@@ -6,6 +6,14 @@
base="apt apt-utils at bsdmainutils console-common console-tools console-tools-libs console-data cpio cron ed exim fdutils gettext-base groff ifupdown info ipchains libident libldap2 liblockfile1 libncurses4 libopenldap-runtime libopenldap1 libpcre3 libsasl7 libwrap0 logrotate mailx man-db manpages modconf nano net-tools netbase netkit-inetd netkit-ping nvi ppp tasksel tcpd telnet"
+if [ ! "$LANG" ]; then
+ TMPLANG=C
+else
+ TMPLANG="$LANG"
+fi
+
+export LANG=C
+
without_package () {
echo "$2" | tr ' ' '\n' | grep -v "^$1$" | tr '\n' ' '
}
@@ -132,6 +140,14 @@
warning "Creating empty exim.conf so exim installs okay"
mkdir -p $TARGET/etc/exim
touch $TARGET/etc/exim/exim.conf
+fi
+
+export LANG="$TMPLANG"
+echo "LANG=$LANG" >> $TARGET/etc/environment
+if [ "$LANG" != C ]; then
+ sed "s/^#$LANG /$LANG /" $TARGET/etc/locale.gen >$TARGET/etc/locale.gen.tmp
+ mv $TARGET/etc/locale.gen.tmp $TARGET/etc/locale.gen
+ in_target locale-gen
fi
info "Installing base packages"
RFC 3 (dbootstrap):
For the problem with the new lilo not working well because of lilo now being
a wrapper that calls /sbin/lilo.real, between the two solutions that I had
presented on my previous report and that nobody commented, I have chosen
this one.
Any comments on this? shall I commit this one?
diff -u -r boot-floppies/utilities/dbootstrap/bootconfig.c boot-floppies.meu/utilities/dbootstrap/bootconfig.c
--- boot-floppies/utilities/dbootstrap/bootconfig.c Sun Apr 15 03:35:57 2001
+++ boot-floppies.meu/utilities/dbootstrap/bootconfig.c Sat Apr 28 23:10:55 2001
@@ -61,7 +61,7 @@
#define BC_LILO_CONF "/target/etc/lilo.conf"
#define BC_INST_MBR "export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=\"/target/lib:/target/usr/lib\"; /target/sbin/install-mbr %s"
#define BC_BOOT_DFLT "export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=\"/target/lib:/target/usr/lib\"; /target/sbin/activate %s %s"
-#define BC_RUN_LILO "export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=\"/target/lib:/target/usr/lib\"; /target/sbin/lilo -r /target >/dev/null"
+#define BC_RUN_LILO "chroot /target /sbin/lilo >/dev/null"
#define BC_SILO_CONF "/target/etc/silo.conf"
#define BC_RUN_SILO "chroot /target /sbin/silo -f >/dev/null"
For the problem of the cd files not being found I had proposed this patch.
Again I ask for comments on it and if I should commit it :-?
diff -u -r boot-floppies/utilities/dbootstrap/extract_base.c boot-floppies.meu/utilities/dbootstrap/extract_base.c
--- boot-floppies/utilities/dbootstrap/extract_base.c Tue Apr 17 10:10:51 2001
+++ boot-floppies.meu/utilities/dbootstrap/extract_base.c Sat Apr 28 23:10:55 2001
@@ -338,7 +338,7 @@
else
{
/* archive is on the filesystem */
- snprintf(prtbuf, sizeof prtbuf, "%s", Archive_Dir);
+ snprintf(prtbuf, sizeof prtbuf, "file:%s", Archive_Dir);
source = prtbuf;
}
argv[0] = "/usr/sbin/debootstrap";
Well, guess this is more or less all I did to have this going from cd, I
have not done a full test of it yet, I suppose it will fail in a lot of
places, but the return, return, return, return, ... procedure is working
with this changes.
What do you think, should I commit all this?
Come on, we are on the good way, let's continue with this, woody has to get
out of jail in two turns now ;-)
Regards...
--
Manty/BestiaTester -> http://manty.net
Reply to: