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

Bug#234466: installation-reports



Package: installation-reports

Debian-installer-version: beta 2, 100MB, CD image, 14-Jan-2004 From
dbian.org/devel/debian-installer

uname -a: I went back to the woody installer so I don't have this :-(
Date: 2/20/2004 11:00 AM
Method: CD-ROM install, CD-ROM boot, using installer image

Machine: Dell OptiPlex GX 240
Processor: P4 1.6 GHz
Memory: 768 MB
Root Device: IDE
Root Size/partition table:
/ 15 GB
/boot 50 MB

Output of lspci:

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:    [e]
Reboot:                 [o]
[O] = OK, [E] = Error (please elaborate below), [ ] = didn't try it

Comments/Problems:
The installer installed LILO with only the Linux partition in
lilo.conf.  This is a multi-boot system which the woody installer did
setup lilo properly to boot the other os.

I found finish and continue confusing on some of the prompts.  Finish
what? versus continue to what?  I tried both with the same results and
it appeared they did the same thing.

After selecting the partitioning scheme it appeared to delay for a long
time until anything changed on screen.  I suspect it was doing the
format, or initialize like the woody installer does and shows, but this
installer showed nothing, just a blue screen (brought back scary
memories).  Partitioning did work as I had selected, just the pause with
no feedback to me was odd.

After reboot and on apt setup it continued to loop over and over and not
ever leaving those screens.

The partitions were also named odd.
Old style was /dev/hda6
What this installer reported was /deb/ide/bus/host/etc something like
that which was long.  If this is by design it was confusing as I
expected the old school naming convention.  Is this cause /dev is
changing (a 2.6 thing) in favor of what is it sysfs, ordevfs?


I really appreciate your efforts and like the overall feel of the
installer.  Great job!


Thanks

John Pywtorak
Programmer
Cal Poly
jpywtora@calpoly.edu





Reply to: