Bug#234466: marked as done (installation-reports)
Your message dated Thu, 6 May 2004 00:56:35 +0200
with message-id <20040505225635.GJ1382@djpig.de>
and subject line Bug#234466: installation-reports
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 Feb 2004 00:44:02 +0000
>From jpywtora@calpoly.edu Mon Feb 23 16:44:02 2004
Return-path: <jpywtora@calpoly.edu>
Received: from email-gateway-michael.its.calpoly.edu [129.65.60.94]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1AvQg6-0002Fw-00; Mon, 23 Feb 2004 16:44:02 -0800
Received: from tubman.ess.calpoly.edu (tubman.ess.calpoly.edu [129.65.210.46])
by email-gateway-michael.its.calpoly.edu (MOS 3.4.4-GR)
with ESMTP id ATG63511;
Mon, 23 Feb 2004 16:43:13 -0800 (PST)
Subject: installation-reports
From: John Pywtorak <jpywtora@calpoly.edu>
To: submit@bugs.debian.org
Content-Type: text/plain
Message-Id: <1077583528.14785.419.camel@tubman.ess.calpoly.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2
Date: 23 Feb 2004 16:45:30 -0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Junkmail-Status: score=0/50, host=email-gateway-michael.calpoly.edu
Delivered-To: submit@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=-5.0 required=4.0 tests=HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no
version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_02_22
X-Spam-Level:
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
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 234466-done) by bugs.debian.org; 5 May 2004 22:56:39 +0000
>From frank@lichtenheld.de Wed May 05 15:56:39 2004
Return-path: <frank@lichtenheld.de>
Received: from mail.sorgfalt.net [217.160.169.191]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1BLVJf-0007zF-00; Wed, 05 May 2004 15:56:39 -0700
Received: from pd9530f86.dip.t-dialin.net ([217.83.15.134] helo=djpig.djpig.de)
by mail.sorgfalt.net with asmtp
(Cipher TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 3.35 (Sorgfalt))
id 1BLVJe-00020B-00
for <234466-done@bugs.debian.org>; Thu, 06 May 2004 00:56:38 +0200
Received: from djpig by djpig.djpig.de with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
id 1BLVJb-0004vr-00
for <234466-done@bugs.debian.org>; Thu, 06 May 2004 00:56:35 +0200
Date: Thu, 6 May 2004 00:56:35 +0200
From: Frank Lichtenheld <djpig@debian.org>
To: 234466-done@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#234466: installation-reports
Message-ID: <20040505225635.GJ1382@djpig.de>
References: <1077583528.14785.419.camel@tubman.ess.calpoly.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1077583528.14785.419.camel@tubman.ess.calpoly.edu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i
Sender: Frank Lichtenheld <frank@lichtenheld.de>
Delivered-To: 234466-done@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
X-Spam-Level:
X-CrossAssassin-Score: 1
On Mon, Feb 23, 2004 at 04:45:30PM -0800, John Pywtorak wrote:
> 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.
This should be fixed in current versions of the installer.
> After reboot and on apt setup it continued to loop over and over and not
> ever leaving those screens.
Should be fixed, too.
> 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?
Don't know if this depends on the used kernel, but I hadn't this
behaviour with current versions.
Closing the bug, thanks for your report.
Gruesse,
--
Frank Lichtenheld <djpig@debian.org>
www: http://www.djpig.de/
Reply to: