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

Bug#275843: Installation report



Peder Chr. Nørgaard wrote:
> P1) D-i asks for "Start PC Card services?" three times during the
> process - one would be more reasonable.  The three times are during
> "Detect and mount CD-ROM", "Detect Network Hardware" and "Detect
> Hardware", respectively.

This is a known problem, we've run out of time to fix it, although a fix
is known.

> P2) The four LAN cards have a different naming scheme
> than under my old (very much updated, but currently
> 2.6.8 based) debian.  Old scheme was
>   eth0 - Realtek PCI card A
>   eth1 - Realtek PCI card B
>   eth2 - Cisco Aironet (mounted on PCI board)
>   eth3 - the on-board connection
> New scheme is
>   eth0 - the on-board connection
>   eth1 - Realtek PCI card A
>   eth2 - Realtek PCI card B
>   eth3 - Cisco Aironet (mounted on PCI board)
> - the new naming scheme is *also* there when I
> boot the installed disk!
> 
> Of course I had to tell d-i to choose "eth1" as "primary
> network interface" - that's where the cable to the world
> sits.

This is probably due to the hardware detection that is added to the boot
process loading modules in a different order than on your old system. As
long as d-i and the installed system match, we're satisfied.

> P3) The partitioning of the disk goes just fine under debian-installer
> - but "parted" (running under the installed system) is not satisfied:
> 
> "Warning: Unable to align partition properly.  This probably means that 
> another
> partitioning tool generated an incorrect partition table, because it didn't 
> have
> the correct BIOS geometry.  It is safe to ignore,but ignoring may cause
> (fixable) problems with some boot loaders."
> 
> How is it that d-i produces a partition table that parted thinks is incorrect?

The 2.6 kernel reports disk geometry in a way that confused parted. This
should have been fixed in parted version 1.6.11-6. We use that version
in the installer, it's possible you installed an older version though.

-- 
see shy jo

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: