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

Bug#236499: installation-reports: debian-installer beta2 (daily) March 5



Package: installation-reports
Severity: Important
Tags: sarge

INSTALL REPORT

Debian-installer-version: Daily Build 5-Mar-2004 downloaded from 
http://gluck.debian.org/cdimage/testing/netinst/i386/daily/
uname -a: <The result of running uname -a on a shell prompt>
Method: netinst 108MB CD image

Machine: Old Compaq computer
Processor: 200 MHz Pentium or some such
Memory: 128MB
Root Device: IDE /dev/hda
Root Size/partition table:
/dev/hda1 /boot  128MB  reiserfs
/dev/hda2 swp  512MB
/dev/hda5 / 3.3GB (Balance of 4GB Disk) reiserfs
Output of lspci:
Not available -- system panic's on boot

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:

Here is my report on installing with reiser after last night's failed 
attempt at using xfs.  Some comments:

During the installation the partitioning of the disk(s) is more 
complicated and/or difficult that it should be.  There are several 
different methods on the netinst disk and most of them are a pain to 
use and get in the way.  Both times I used the menu item "Configure and 
mount partitions" and this was easy to get the configuration I wanted.  
The only problem is it apparently does not tell the installation 
process that the disk(s) have been configured so every time I finish a 
step the installer wants me to partition the disks!

Reboot went well except for fsck.reiserfs was not found.

fsck.reiserfs was not found during the boot up.

Grub was the boot manager choosen during the installation process but 
during the post-install LILO was installed -- why?  Luckily it wasn't 
installed.

I'm guessing you've heard this a million times so I'll add my voice: why 
isn't the 2.6 kernel installed?  It is more important to me to have 
sarge have a modern kernel rather than the old 2.4 kernel which is 
about to join 2.2 in maintenance mode.  I really hope the when sarge is 
made the stable release it will be based on the 2.6 kernel -- even if 
this results in an additional delay.

I hope this feedback is useful and I've filled in all the proper 
information in a meaningful way.  If not, please let me know the 
correct way.

        TIA,
        Bill



Reply to: