Bug#230440: marked as done (FWD: Re: INSTALL REPORT with 2004-01-09 netinst, failed)
Your message dated Fri, 11 Jun 2004 20:03:58 -0400
with message-id <20040612000358.GA10417@kitenet.net>
and subject line processing report
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; 30 Jan 2004 23:36:44 +0000
>From joey@kitenet.net Fri Jan 30 15:36:44 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 1AmiBo-0000NX-00; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 15:36:44 -0800
Received: from dragon.kitenet.net (pm3naxs21-50.access.naxs.com [216.98.95.50])
(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 010DD18059
for <submit@bugs.debian.org>; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 23:36:40 +0000 (GMT)
Received: by dragon.kitenet.net (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id BA1F96ECB2; Fri, 30 Jan 2004 18:44:21 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 18:44:21 -0500
From: Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>
To: submit@bugs.debian.org
Subject: FWD: Re: INSTALL REPORT with 2004-01-09 netinst, failed
Message-ID: <20040130234421.GE3742@kitenet.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="6Vw0j8UKbyX0bfpA"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_01_27
(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_27
X-Spam-Level:
--6Vw0j8UKbyX0bfpA
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Package: installation-reports
=20
The following installation report was posted to debian-boot, and,
according to my records, never followed up on. I am putting it in the
BTS so it will not be lost.
----- Forwarded message from Yann Dirson <ydirson@fr.alcove.com> -----
=46rom: Yann Dirson <ydirson@fr.alcove.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 16:41:51 +0100
To: debian-boot@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: INSTALL REPORT with 2004-01-09 netinst, failed
As I attempt to do more not-so-uncommon things (with the 2004-01-03
snapshot)...
- I initially have a HD with a single ext3 partition + swap (from a
previous RH install). If I repartition by deleting the ext3 and
repartitionning that space in 2, on the partition setup screen I
notice the 1st partition is already listed as ext3, and the 2nd not.
Then I realize it comes from the previous (RH) install. I had not
realized that when just selecting a single partition, when I thought
"ext3" was just a default.
Now if my original single-partition-over-RH had gone throught the
reboot stage, I may surely have ended up with a strange install. And
indeed the nc binary I had noticed, as well as the __libc_stack_end
issues probably derive from that.
-> Maybe the partition-setup screen could emphasize this issue ?
-> How about forcing system partitions (/, /usr(/*)?, /var(/*)?) to
be formatted, or at least require confirmation ?
-> Is it really a good idea to use those programs just installed
before rebooting ?
- Now when I decide to split the existing partition in 2, but do not
realize I must explicitely select "format as ext3", since my partition
already appears as having ext3 selected (I thought), and go on, I'm
brought back to the main menu on the next step, and requesting to
install the base system brings me back there again almost instantly.
Only by looking at syslog I finally notice a "read beyond end of
device" attempt, which finally enlighten me on what's going on.
-> the user should be notified of such errors by an error box.
-> What about forcing the user to reformat such partitions, which we
can decide must be invalid because they just reuse an existing block ?
=20
Or, probably better, when destroying a partition, we (cfdisk ?) could
ask the user whether to nuke the 1st sectors, to avoid further
misdetection.
- Once base packages are unpacked, while setting up lilo, I'm now
presented with a textbox containing the devfs name for the disk. If I
want to install lilo in another location, it looks like I have to know
the devfs path, whereas in the old installer I could choose in a list,
which is much more suited to people not knowing devfs
BTW, is it wise at all to use devfs, which is tagged as OBSOLETE in 2.6 !?
- Selecting "French" as the keyboard layout after reboot, I do not
have time to see the keymap name, and subsequent error message, before
the next dialog screen. And I end up with a querty-looking layout.
Looking at base-config.log, it appears that the selected layout is
mac-usb-fr (!). That reminds me of a long-gone issue in console-tools
debconf settings. Is it possible that some old
config-scripts/templates are kept around ?
Just after that, I get "KDGKBENT at index 128 in table 8: invalid
argument", "failed to dump keymap" and "not loading keymap" messages,
which may explain why I still have a qwerty layout.
In the meantime, I was asked to enter the root password... and did
that using the qwerty layout, which is sure to give me an
unretrievable password when I change back to the correct layout
(ie. fr-pc).
If then I attempt to "loadkeys fr-pc" it works fine, but if I
"install-keymap fr-pc" I get the same error messages.
- When asked to select (again) an http mirror for downloading
packages, 1) my previous selection is not the default, maybe because
of 2) the country names being listed in english, despite all other
text being correctly in french. However, the proxy information was
correctly memorized.
Regards,
--=20
Yann Dirson <Yann.Dirson@fr.alcove.com> http://www.alcove.c=
om/
Technical support manager Responsable de l'assistance techni=
que
Senior Free-Software Consultant Consultant senior en Logiciels Lib=
res
Debian developer (dirson@debian.org) D=E9veloppeur D=
ebian
--=20
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.o=
rg
----- End forwarded message -----
--=20
see shy jo
--6Vw0j8UKbyX0bfpA
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)
iD8DBQFAGuxVd8HHehbQuO8RAis8AKDd0F692q1s2uSvYfPbvxeWehMxcwCg68Jn
W1fzSJk3DkaqwTX9pyque5k=
=yq5X
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--6Vw0j8UKbyX0bfpA--
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 230440-done) by bugs.debian.org; 12 Jun 2004 00:09:45 +0000
>From joey@kitenet.net Fri Jun 11 17:09:45 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 1BYw5h-0000rn-00; Fri, 11 Jun 2004 17:09:45 -0700
Received: from dragon.kitenet.net (216-98-95-250.access.naxs.com [216.98.95.250])
(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 D649D187B7
for <230440-done@bugs.debian.org>; Sat, 12 Jun 2004 00:09:42 +0000 (GMT)
Received: by dragon.kitenet.net (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id 655CC6ED98; Fri, 11 Jun 2004 20:03:58 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 20:03:58 -0400
From: Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>
To: 230440-done@bugs.debian.org
Subject: processing report
Message-ID: <20040612000358.GA10417@kitenet.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="a8Wt8u1KmwUX3Y2C"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040523i
Delivered-To: 230440-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=-3.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no
version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
X-Spam-Level:
--a8Wt8u1KmwUX3Y2C
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I'm processing old installation reports, and have, finally, gotten to
yours. Thanks for talking the time to file an installation report.
I'm closing your installation report, after determining that:
- Some problems you reported are no longer present in current versions of t=
he
installer.
- You tried to do something unsupported with the Debian installer.
If you can, please try installing again using a current version of the
debian installer. I recommend the tc1 release, which you can find on our
web page, <http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-installer/>. If you can, try
to reproduce the problems you reported using it, so we can verify that
they're all fixed. We look forward to your new installation report.
--=20
see shy jo
--a8Wt8u1KmwUX3Y2C
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)
iD8DBQFAykhud8HHehbQuO8RAi0FAJ46+rQDgATr45qOGq9gMl6kTxknPACg0JeP
Yt+u4hVHmyXYcvYmWpQyhDA=
=yvy3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--a8Wt8u1KmwUX3Y2C--
Reply to: