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

Bug#231106: marked as done (Domain name server address should default to gateway address)



Your message dated Mon, 23 Feb 2004 15:32:31 -0500
with message-id <E1AvMkh-0003hz-00@newraff.debian.org>
and subject line Bug#231106: fixed in netcfg 0.46
has caused the attached Bug report 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 I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 4 Feb 2004 13:18:28 +0000
>From aleidenf@bigpond.net.au Wed Feb 04 05:18:27 2004
Return-path: <aleidenf@bigpond.net.au>
Received: from gizmo12ps.bigpond.com [144.140.71.22] 
	by spohr.debian.org with smtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 1AoMvD-0003lE-00; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 05:18:27 -0800
Received: (qmail 30426 invoked from network); 4 Feb 2004 13:13:54 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO psmam03.bigpond.com) (144.135.25.75)
  by gizmo12ps.bigpond.com with SMTP; 4 Feb 2004 13:13:54 -0000
Received: from cpe-144-132-189-89.nsw.bigpond.net.au ([144.132.189.89]) by psmam03.bigpond.com(MAM REL_3_4_2 83/52009299) with SMTP id 52009299; Wed, 04 Feb 2004 23:17:54 +1000
Subject: installation-reports: sarge i386 beta2, success but severe glitches
From: Andree Leidenfrost <aleidenf@bigpond.net.au>
To: submit@bugs.debian.org
Content-Type: text/plain
Organization: private
Message-Id: <1075900673.958.63.camel@aurich.ostfriesland>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2004 00:17:53 +1100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_02_01 
	(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.0 required=4.0 tests=HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no 
	version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_02_01
X-Spam-Level: 

Package: installation-reports 
Debian-installer-version: beta2, Debian website
uname -a: whateer came with the installer, 2.4.22...
Date: 04 Feb 04, 21:00:00 GMT+11
Method: installed of 100MB CD, rest from mirror.aarnet.edu.au via ftp

Machine: home grown
Processor: AMD Athlon(tm) XP 2400+ stepping 01
Memory: 512MB
Root Device: /dev/hda2
Root Size/partition table: 
/dev/hda1 swap         1GB
/dev/hda2 /          150MB
/dev/hda3 /root      150MB
/dev/hda5 /tmp         1GB
/dev/hda6 /var         1GB
/dev/hda7 /usr         3GB
/dev/hda8 /usr/local   1GB
/dev/hda9 /home       33GB

Output of lspci (from woody):

00:00.0 Host bridge: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT8367 [KT266]
00:01.0 PCI bridge: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT8367 [KT266 AGP]
00:06.0 Ethernet controller: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. RTL-8139 (rev 10)
00:10.0 USB Controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. UHCI USB (rev 80)
00:10.1 USB Controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. UHCI USB (rev 80)
00:10.2 USB Controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. UHCI USB (rev 80)
00:10.3 USB Controller: VIA Technologies, Inc.: Unknown device 3104 (rev 82)
00:11.0 ISA bridge: VIA Technologies, Inc.: Unknown device 3177
00:11.1 IDE interface: VIA Technologies, Inc. Bus Master IDE (rev 06)
00:11.5 Multimedia audio controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. AC97 Audio Controller (rev 50)
01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: ATI Technologies Inc: Unknown device 4966 (rev 01)
01:00.1 Display controller: ATI Technologies Inc: Unknown device 496e (rev 01)

Base System Installation Checklist:

Initial boot worked:	[O]
Configure network HW:	[O]
Config network:		[O]
Detect CD:		[O]
Load installer modules:	[O]
Detect hard drives:	[O]
Partition hard drives:	[O]
Create file systems:	[O]
Mount partitions:	[O]
Install base system:	[O]
Install boot loader:	[O]
Reboot:			[O]
[O] = OK, [E] = Error (please elaborate below), [ ] = didn't try it

Comments/Problems:

Having been a Debian user for 9 years, I'm really impressed.

As far as the non-graphical installer goes: I consider it a featue not a bug - 
a graphical installer really only looks better but doesn't give additioanl
functionality or ease of use. And surely, a non-grphical installer is way more
frugal regarding resources - think people in less privileged countries.

I'll try to avoid the old hat stuff like vicious circle for apt or outdated
kernel. The things I consider most severe are makred with '*', the rest is '-'.

At the end are a few remarks regarding testing in general. Although not part
of d-i, I thought I mention them because they had a lage impact on my
installation experience...

Initial install from CD:
- 'Detecting hardware' runs *three* times all in all. Can't we bring that down
  to 1? (Maybe the fact that I don't have a floopy is responsible.)
- name server should default to gateway rather than being blank IMHO (if no DHCP)
- the hostname is being asked for twice, not good
- domain not asked for, not good
* there is no feedback during filesystem and mountpoint creation, not good
  ('Creating filesystems and mount points - please, stand by' would suffice)
* there is no possibility to do a badblock scan of the HDD, not good
- 'Installing base system' stops at 75% and finishes, cosmetic but irritating
- 'Installing extra packages' stops at 66% and finishes, cosmetic but irritating
  (less than above because quicker)
- install does not try/offer to setup Australian Telstra Bigpond cable modem via
  bpalogin (yeah, might only be me but than again not...)

After reboot:
* I get a message saying: Invalid hostname "aurich3" and some blurb - aurich3 is
  definitely a perfectly valid hostname!
- hotplug is not part of CD - I'm surprised, there's is probablt a reason, though
* lilo config should default to offering choice so that people can specifiy things
  like 'single'

After installation:
* the X windows packages are terribly outdated - there is no excuse for this!
* configuration of xserver-xfree86 should really offer 1280x1024@60 (because
  that's what I use ;-) and so do many others - better 17" TFT)
* X windows is still not working for me, I finally get a graphical screen, the
  mouse is working, *the keyboboard isn't* and I can't even boot into single mode
  to examine the situation - cf. above regarding lilo setup (yeah, I can boot the
  Installation CD in rescue mode I suppose) My system is more than a year old!
- why is gdm not part of the gnome package (I have selected gnome in dselect)?
- time is messed up
- many outdated packages: postfix 2.0.16, mozilla 1.5, xsane 0.91, X,...
- Question: Do you want set up mandb setuid man? Explanation: nothing <doh>
- had to speciify the paper size twice
and so forth...

Bottom line: Debian is truely great (tried RedHat, Mandrake, Suse) - but still
only for the initiated - not read for the average desktop user :-(
-- 
Andree Leidenfrost
Sydney - Australia


---------------------------------------
Received: (at 231106-close) by bugs.debian.org; 23 Feb 2004 20:38:36 +0000
>From katie@ftp-master.debian.org Mon Feb 23 12:38:36 2004
Return-path: <katie@ftp-master.debian.org>
Received: from newraff.debian.org [208.185.25.31] (mail)
	by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 1AvMqZ-0004JI-00; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 12:38:36 -0800
Received: from katie by newraff.debian.org with local (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 1AvMkh-0003hz-00; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 15:32:31 -0500
From: Joshua Kwan <joshk@triplehelix.org>
To: 231106-close@bugs.debian.org
X-Katie: $Revision: 1.43 $
Subject: Bug#231106: fixed in netcfg 0.46
Message-Id: <E1AvMkh-0003hz-00@newraff.debian.org>
Sender: Archive Administrator <katie@ftp-master.debian.org>
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 15:32:31 -0500
Delivered-To: 231106-close@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_02_22 
	(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.0 required=4.0 tests=HAS_BUG_NUMBER autolearn=no 
	version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_02_22
X-Spam-Level: 

Source: netcfg
Source-Version: 0.46

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
netcfg, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive:

netcfg-dhcp_0.46_i386.udeb
  to pool/main/n/netcfg/netcfg-dhcp_0.46_i386.udeb
netcfg-static_0.46_i386.udeb
  to pool/main/n/netcfg/netcfg-static_0.46_i386.udeb
netcfg_0.46.dsc
  to pool/main/n/netcfg/netcfg_0.46.dsc
netcfg_0.46.tar.gz
  to pool/main/n/netcfg/netcfg_0.46.tar.gz
netcfg_0.46_i386.udeb
  to pool/main/n/netcfg/netcfg_0.46_i386.udeb



A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is
attached.

Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed.  If you
have further comments please address them to 231106@bugs.debian.org,
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Joshua Kwan <joshk@triplehelix.org> (supplier of updated netcfg package)

(This message was generated automatically at their request; if you
believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive
administrators by mailing ftpmaster@debian.org)


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Format: 1.7
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 09:32:27 -0800
Source: netcfg
Binary: netcfg-static netcfg-dhcp netcfg
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.46
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian Install System Team <debian-boot@lists.debian.org>
Changed-By: Joshua Kwan <joshk@triplehelix.org>
Description: 
 netcfg     - Configure the network (udeb)
 netcfg-dhcp - Configure the network via DHCP (udeb)
 netcfg-static - Configure a static network (udeb)
Closes: 214491 224912 225512 231106 231107
Changes: 
 netcfg (0.46) unstable; urgency=low
 .
   * Joshua Kwan
     - Added wireless configuration support for ESSIDs and WEP keys
       using libiw. (Closes: #225512, #214491)
     - Made default text for nameserver match gateway when in static
       configuration. (Closes: #231106)
     - Bump netcfg/get_domain to priority high. (Closes: #231107)
       using libiw.
     - Check entered IP addresses for gateway, netmask (special case allowing
       '0' entries), IP address, and PPP endpoint. (Closes: #224912)
   * Joey Hess
     - First round of template polishing on new templates.
   * Translations:
     - Miroslav Kure
       - Updated Czech translation
     - Elian Myftiu
       - Updated Albanian translation (sq.po)
     - Carlos Z.F. Liu
       - Updated Simplified Chinese translation (zh_CN.po)
     - Kenshi Muto
       - Updated Japanese translation (ja.po)
     - Eugeniy Meshcheryakov
       - Updated Ukrainian translation (uk.po)
     - André Luís Lopes
       - Updated Brazilian Portuguese translation (pt_BR.po)
     - Jordi Mallach
       - Updated Catalan translation (ca.po)
     * Claus Hindsgaul
       - Updated Danish translation (da.po)
Files: 
 e51f50ebfeccd2351221eb6e12ef2c07 1473 debian-installer optional netcfg_0.46.dsc
 cfb8fcc1138cf84a7539a0f15ba76557 121954 debian-installer optional netcfg_0.46.tar.gz
 6a5c3b1e701f456dad9a27540f4c2db3 86636 debian-installer optional netcfg_0.46_i386.udeb
 177e8fb1170eb8d105f25464c6d1e3b1 64588 debian-installer optional netcfg-dhcp_0.46_i386.udeb
 09754b91e8115f474bce764aa9be0195 72030 debian-installer optional netcfg-static_0.46_i386.udeb

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
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=SJXU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



Reply to: