Bug#229328: marked as done (lvmcfg: lvm10 is not installed into new installation)
Your message dated Thu, 4 Mar 2004 20:04:27 -0500
with message-id <20040305010427.GB20539@kitenet.net>
and subject line Fixed in NMU of lvmcfg 0.17
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; 24 Jan 2004 10:21:46 +0000
>From apollock@andrew.net.au Sat Jan 24 02:21:46 2004
Return-path: <apollock@andrew.net.au>
Received: from dsl-203-113-233-34.act.netspace.net.au (caesar.andrew.net.au) [203.113.233.34]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1AkKvC-0002oq-00; Sat, 24 Jan 2004 02:21:46 -0800
Received: from brutus (brutus.andrew.net.au [172.16.0.2])
by caesar.andrew.net.au (8.12.11.Beta0/8.12.11.Beta0/Debian-1) with ESMTP id i0OALhd3012246;
Sat, 24 Jan 2004 21:21:43 +1100
Received: from apollock by brutus with local (Exim 4.30)
id 1AkKv8-0002Xd-Oz; Sat, 24 Jan 2004 21:21:42 +1100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Andrew Pollock <apollock@debian.org>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: lvmcfg: lvm10 is not installed into new installation
X-Mailer: reportbug 2.37
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2004 21:21:42 +1100
Message-Id: <E1AkKv8-0002Xd-Oz@brutus>
Sender: Andrew Pollock <apollock@brutus.andrew.net.au>
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_01_20
(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_01_20
X-Spam-Level:
Package: lvmcfg
Version: d-i beta 2
Severity: important
When using LVM in d-i to create volume groups and logical volumes, the
lvm10 package isn't installed into the new installation, so when it
boots, it can't activate the volume group(s) and therefore can't mount
any filesystems on the logical volume(s) in that/those volume group(s)
see the thread from
http://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2003/debian-boot-200312/msg01136.html
for more details on what may be the problem.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux brutus 2.4.24-1-686 #1 Tue Jan 6 21:29:44 EST 2004 i686
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 229328-done) by bugs.debian.org; 5 Mar 2004 01:04:13 +0000
>From joey@kitenet.net Thu Mar 04 17:04:13 2004
Return-path: <joey@kitenet.net>
Received: from kitenet.net [64.62.161.42] (postfix)
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1Az3l7-0000ZB-00; Thu, 04 Mar 2004 17:04:13 -0800
Received: from dragon.kitenet.net (216-98-95-58.access.naxs.com [216.98.95.58])
(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
(Client CN "Joey Hess", Issuer "Joey Hess" (verified OK))
by kitenet.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3762117FE5
for <229328-done@bugs.debian.org>; Fri, 5 Mar 2004 01:04:11 +0000 (GMT)
Received: by dragon.kitenet.net (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id F29D66F3FD; Thu, 4 Mar 2004 20:04:28 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 20:04:27 -0500
From: Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>
To: 229328-done@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Fixed in NMU of lvmcfg 0.17
Message-ID: <20040305010427.GB20539@kitenet.net>
References: <[🔎] E1Az3G1-0007pS-00@newraff.debian.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="U+BazGySraz5kW0T"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <[🔎] E1Az3G1-0007pS-00@newraff.debian.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i
Delivered-To: 229328-done@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_01
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=4.0 tests=none autolearn=no
version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_01
X-Spam-Level:
--U+BazGySraz5kW0T
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Forgot I'm not in uploaders. This big should be fixed, lemme know if
not.
Joey Hess wrote:
> tag 229328 + fixed
>=20
> quit
>=20
> This message was generated automatically in response to a
> non-maintainer upload. The .changes file follows.
>=20
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>=20
> Format: 1.7
> Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 19:12:19 -0500
> Source: lvmcfg
> Binary: lvmcfg
> Architecture: source all
> Version: 0.17
> Distribution: unstable
> Urgency: low
> Maintainer: Debian Install System Team <debian-boot@lists.debian.org>
> Changed-By: Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>
> Description:=20
> lvmcfg - Configure the Logical Volume Manager (udeb)
> Closes: 229328
> Changes:=20
> lvmcfg (0.17) unstable; urgency=3Dlow
> .
> * Applied a patch from Andrew Pollock to fix lvm10 apt-install.
> Untested. Closes: #229328, we hope.
> Files:=20
> 5ba3427993d1e77f7a8e4ed627e15d47 587 debian-installer optional lvmcfg_0.=
17.dsc
> d2abda3508357a5643b7a6f3aa5b1587 65694 debian-installer optional lvmcfg_=
0.17.tar.gz
> 3fcf218a40e5281c0aad23149ab081b6 54494 debian-installer optional lvmcfg_=
0.17_all.udeb
>=20
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
>=20
> iD8DBQFAR8YY2tp5zXiKP0wRAkMjAKCSDQPnMtd14hxZ6XnRft+5LIoMoQCgtQAF
> JONegqUCEBtU3XkCa9nsh2A=3D
> =3DD6Zy
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>=20
--=20
see shy jo
--U+BazGySraz5kW0T
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFAR9Iad8HHehbQuO8RAsDgAJ9OcsiztD5aLM6wgd1e9wDCOhANOQCgvgx+
DNR13PRVjVNat3wKgvHUiYs=
=r4yn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--U+BazGySraz5kW0T--
Reply to: