Bug#268792: Unicode (UTF-8) bug still present and failure to download libc6-udeb
Stephen R Marenka wrote:
On Thu, Oct 28, 2004 at 09:27:57PM +0200, Erik C.J. Laan wrote:
Erik C.J. Laan wrote:
Stephen R Marenka wrote:
Please try the initrd22.gz image in the same directory. It is intended
for 2.2 kernels, whereas the initrd.gz kernel is intended for 2.4
kernels.
I'll check that image on my box too.
OK, will do. I was already wondering that the -22 was about.
Hi Stephen,
Magic hint that. The "Unicode trouble" is gone, and it has just gotten
past "retreiving libc6-udeb" en "unpacking libc6-udeb" successfully.
I'll update the installation report after the installation has finished
completely (probably tomorrow morning Central European Time).
I've tried to document all the "magic" in
<http://d-i.alioth.debian.org/manual/en.m68k/index.html>.
I was still using the installation howto I printed on March 3rd when I
first tested d-i after you're call for testers on the debian-68k
maillist. With the handwritten addition that a 13000 bytes ramdisk was
enough. I picked up that knowledge from another message from you to
debian-68k@lists.d.o, but I don't know when exactly. I'm not on
debian-boot. So that's why I didn't know about initrd22.gz.
Please feel free to give it a read and give me some feedback.
Maybe I'll do, but I still have quite some documents printed ready to
review (for my work and other hobbies).
But, I tried finding the string "initrd22" in the document from the URL
above. In chapter 3.3.1.1 in the document I found reference to a .txt
and a .pdf version. The .txt version gave me a 404, so I downloaded the
.pdf version. My acrobat reader could not find the string in there. Next
I checked all HTML documents, also to no avail. So it looks like the
magic is not yet in the manual ;-). May I suggest chapter 4.4 "Preparing
Files for Hard Disk Booting" for this information? That's where I looked
first. Also, it is still kinda small overall.
Back to the installation:
The first installation attempt with initrd22.gz crashed with an oops.
Probably because I did "swapon /dev/sdd4" before the partitioning. I
subsequently wanted /dev/sdd4 used for swap, but could not get the
partitioner to not touch /dev/sdd4 (probably my own fault), so I had to
"swapoff /dev/sdd4". This took quite some time, and maybe later resulted
in the oops?
The second attempt has stalled at the same point: trying to write the
partition table. Low-mem troubles?
The 4 messages on VC3 are:
"Log file trincated to save memory." # Twice
"Segmentation fault" # Twice
And the last few lines on VC4 are:
<timestamp> main-menu[505]: DEBUG: Menu item 'partman' selected
<timestamp> main-menu[505]: DEBUG: configure partman, status: 2
<timestamp> main-menu[505]: DEBUG: configure libc6, status: 0
<timestamp> main-menu[505]: DEBUG: virtual package libc6
<timestamp> main-menu[505]: DEBUG: configure libparted1.6-0, status: 0
<timestamp> main-menu[505]: DEBUG: virtual package libparted1.6-0
<timestamp> main-menu[505]: DEBUG: configure harddrive-detection, status: 0
<timestamp> main-menu[505]: DEBUG: virtual package harddrive-detection
<timestamp+17 minutes> partman: userdevfs: update-dev
# I think those 17 minutes where the time I took to do the partman-magic
of selecting the root-filesystem, marking it to become "ext2", to be
mounted on "/" and "yes: format it".
<timestamp+1h13m> init: ^MStarting pid 478, console /dev/vc/2: '/bin/sh'
# That was when I wanted to check the debugging and "cat /proc/meminfo"
which gives (layout changed for readability):
total Mem: 23207936 Swap: 0
used Mem: 22962176 Swap: 0
free: Mem: 245760 Swap: 0
shared Mem: 741376
buffers Mem: 13115392
cached Mem: 577536
MemTotal: 22664 kB
MemFree: 240 kB
MemShared: 724 kB
Buffers: 12808 kB
Cached: 564 kB
SwapTotal: 0 kB
SwapFree: 0 kB
Thanks for all the good work and HTH, Erik.
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Erik C.J. Laan elaan at dds.nl
Please reply below the message, please cut unrelevant pieces from a reply.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply to: