Bug#294570: marked as done (Package: installation-reports)
Your message dated Thu, 10 Feb 2005 18:52:36 +0100
with message-id <200502101852.37346.aragorn@tiscali.nl>
and subject line Bug#294570: Package: 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; 10 Feb 2005 13:56:51 +0000
>From geniusdex@anope.org Thu Feb 10 05:56:50 2005
Return-path: <geniusdex@anope.org>
Received: from smtpq3.home.nl [213.51.128.198]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1CzEoM-0007Oc-00; Thu, 10 Feb 2005 05:56:50 -0800
Received: from [213.51.128.134] (port=37124 helo=smtp3.home.nl)
by smtpq3.home.nl with esmtp (Exim 4.30)
id 1CzEoL-00042C-Ia
for submit@bugs.debian.org; Thu, 10 Feb 2005 14:56:49 +0100
Received: from cp12624-c.dbsch1.nb.home.nl ([84.27.117.154]:33388 helo=centaur)
by smtp3.home.nl with esmtp (Exim 4.30)
id 1CzEoK-0001K2-DK
for submit@bugs.debian.org; Thu, 10 Feb 2005 14:56:48 +0100
Received: from worm ([192.168.2.3])
by centaur with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian))
id 1CzEoK-0001AZ-00
for <submit@bugs.debian.org>; Thu, 10 Feb 2005 14:56:48 +0100
Message-ID: <[🔎] 420B681F.5090100@anope.org>
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 14:56:47 +0100
From: GeniusDex <geniusdex@anope.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.9 (X11/20041124)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: submit@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Package: installation-reports
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-AtHome-MailScanner-Information: Please contact support@home.nl for more information
X-AtHome-MailScanner: Found to be clean
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-Spam-Level:
Package: installation-reports
Debian-installer-version: RC2 netinst i386
uname -a: Linux capo 2.6.10 #2 SMP Mon Feb 7 21:10:49 CET 2005 i686 GNU/Linux (note: i immediately upgraded the kernel from the shipped expert26 kernel after installation)
Date: Sunday 6 February 2005
Method: Installed from the downloaded iso, but pointed it to to internet mirror sites as soon as the installer allowed me. I'm using ftp.nl.debian.org .
Machine: Custom-built P4 webserver, Asus P4P800 SE motherboard
Processor: P4 3.00 GHz (HT)
Memory: 2 GB (4x 512 MB kingston)
Root Device: Software raid1 made of two 10k rpm 37 GB WD raptors connected by SATA. Raid was created by the installer
Root Size/partition table: 35 GB root (/) for all files, 1.5 GB swap
Output of lspci and lspci -n:
0000:00:00.0 Host bridge: Intel Corp. 82865G/PE/P DRAM Controller/Host-Hub Interface (rev 02)
0000:00:01.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corp. 82865G/PE/P PCI to AGP Controller (rev 02)
0000:00:1d.0 USB Controller: Intel Corp. 82801EB/ER (ICH5/ICH5R) USB UHCI #1 (rev 02)
0000:00:1d.1 USB Controller: Intel Corp. 82801EB/ER (ICH5/ICH5R) USB UHCI #2 (rev 02)
0000:00:1d.2 USB Controller: Intel Corp. 82801EB/ER (ICH5/ICH5R) USB UHCI #3 (rev 02)
0000:00:1d.3 USB Controller: Intel Corp. 82801EB/ER (ICH5/ICH5R) USB UHCI #4 (rev 02)
0000:00:1d.7 USB Controller: Intel Corp. 82801EB/ER (ICH5/ICH5R) USB2 EHCI Controller (rev 02)
0000:00:1e.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corp. 82801 PCI Bridge (rev c2)
0000:00:1f.0 ISA bridge: Intel Corp. 82801EB/ER (ICH5/ICH5R) LPC Bridge (rev 02)
0000:00:1f.1 IDE interface: Intel Corp. 82801EB/ER (ICH5/ICH5R) Ultra ATA 100 Storage Controller (rev 02)
0000:00:1f.2 RAID bus controller: Intel Corp. 82801EB (ICH5R) SATA (cc=RAID) (rev 02)
0000:00:1f.3 SMBus: Intel Corp. 82801EB/ER (ICH5/ICH5R) SMBus Controller (rev 02)
0000:02:05.0 Ethernet controller: Marvell Technology Group Ltd. Yukon Gigabit Ethernet 10/100/1000Base-T Adapter (rev 13)
0000:02:0b.0 VGA compatible controller: Cirrus Logic GD 5446 (rev 45)
0000:00:00.0 0600: 8086:2570 (rev 02)
0000:00:01.0 0604: 8086:2571 (rev 02)
0000:00:1d.0 0c03: 8086:24d2 (rev 02)
0000:00:1d.1 0c03: 8086:24d4 (rev 02)
0000:00:1d.2 0c03: 8086:24d7 (rev 02)
0000:00:1d.3 0c03: 8086:24de (rev 02)
0000:00:1d.7 0c03: 8086:24dd (rev 02)
0000:00:1e.0 0604: 8086:244e (rev c2)
0000:00:1f.0 0601: 8086:24d0 (rev 02)
0000:00:1f.1 0101: 8086:24db (rev 02)
0000:00:1f.2 0104: 8086:24df (rev 02)
0000:00:1f.3 0c05: 8086:24d3 (rev 02)
0000:02:05.0 0200: 11ab:4320 (rev 13)
0000:02:0b.0 0300: 1013:00b8 (rev 45)
Base System Installation Checklist:
[O] = OK, [E] = Error (please elaborate below), [ ] = didn't try it
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]
Comments/Problems:
I had some issues with getting software raid to work at first, but after a bit of playing i got it all working. If there's some good documentation provided for this it should be ok. Also there should be a note that lilo has to be installed on the RAID devices and on the actual disks itself. Took me several tries of entering sda/sdb and it's partitions to figure that out.
Also, the kernel module detection detects too much modules, and a few of them fail to load. Those modules appear to be general modules (i have no exact names of them), and everything worked well without them loaded though.
Good job on this installer! It's really a good thing :)
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 294570-done) by bugs.debian.org; 10 Feb 2005 17:53:06 +0000
>From aragorn@tiscali.nl Thu Feb 10 09:53:06 2005
Return-path: <aragorn@tiscali.nl>
Received: from smtp-b2c.tiscali.nl (ha-smtp2.tiscali.nl) [195.241.80.19]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1CzIV0-0003bb-00; Thu, 10 Feb 2005 09:53:06 -0800
Received: from strider.fjphome.nl (195-240-184-66-mx.xdsl.tiscali.nl [195.240.184.66])
by ha-smtp2.tiscali.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id E91ED4BCA91;
Thu, 10 Feb 2005 18:52:28 +0100 (CET)
From: Frans Pop <aragorn@tiscali.nl>
To: GeniusDex <geniusdex@anope.org>, 294570-done@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#294570: Package: installation-reports
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 18:52:36 +0100
User-Agent: KMail/1.7.1
References: <[🔎] 420B681F.5090100@anope.org>
In-Reply-To: <[🔎] 420B681F.5090100@anope.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200502101852.37346.aragorn@tiscali.nl>
Delivered-To: 294570-done@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-Spam-Level:
On Thursday 10 February 2005 14:56, GeniusDex wrote:
> I had some issues with getting software raid to work at first, but
> after a bit of playing i got it all working. If there's some good
> documentation provided for this it should be ok.
Basic instructions for installing with RAID and LVM are in the
installation manual. These could probably be elaborated a bit.
> Also there should be a
> note that lilo has to be installed on the RAID devices and on the
> actual disks itself. Took me several tries of entering sda/sdb and it's
> partitions to figure that out.
Bootloader will only be installed on one of the disks by the installation
system. Automatic detection of correct options does not yet work in all
situations. Improvements in this area are on the TODO list.
> Also, the kernel module detection
> detects too much modules, and a few of them fail to load. Those modules
> appear to be general modules (i have no exact names of them), and
> everything worked well without them loaded though.
This is not really a bug but a feature.
> Good job on this installer! It's really a good thing :)
Thanks.
Closing your report as the installation was successful and there were no
real issues. Thanks for submitting the report,
Cheers,
FJP
Reply to: