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

Re: Problems installing Potato over the network via proxy

S.Salman Ahmed <ssahmed@pathcom.com> writes:

> In all cases, I got varying error messages ranging from "connection
> refused" to "unable to resolve ...". I was never able to use the Proxy
> server at the client's site. Instead, I had to resort to installing
> Squid on a RedHat system and then specifying that machine as the Proxy
> server.

It sounds like, for some reason, we don't support that proxy.

> The installer never actually gave useful error messages and we did try
> quite a few permutations of the Proxy URL in hopes of "getting it
> right"!!

Yes, there are a lot of cases where we don't fail very well....

> What would have been the correct way to enter in the Proxy information ?

I'm sure you did it correctly.  At least, it looked like it to me.

> I may still have to install some more Linux systems at this client's
> site, and of course only plan to install Debian. If woody is released by
> then, I will of course use the Woody boot floppies. But otherwise I will
> continue to use the Potato boot floppies.

Well, that's up to you.  I would recommend buying a Debian CD for
install -- you can use that to install over the network using an NFS
server, for instance.

> Its quite possible that the proxy server at this place is configured in
> a manner that causes problems with the Debian installer.

It would seem so.

> I haven't tried the Woody boot floppies as yet, but plan to do so on a
> test system at the client's site.

Yes.  If possible, could you test if your proxy either works or
doesn't work when installing using the Woody floppies?  We aren't
developing Potato anymore, but if you find there is a problem with
Woody, perhaps you could file a bug (or let us know if you don't know
how to file a bug), being sure to include some data on what the proxy
software is and what exact authentication scheme it uses.

...Adam Di Carlo..<adam@onshore-devel.com>...<URL:http://www.onshored.com/>

Reply to: