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

Re: 3 days until end of test period

On Thu, 2005-03-17 at 08:07, Holger Levsen wrote:
> Hi Rick,
> On Thursday 17 March 2005 09:11, Rick_Thomas wrote:
> > The only difficulty I had is that it tried to install quik and failed
> > because I didn't create any boot partition -- because I prefer to use
> > MacOS-9 with BootX as my boot loader.  So for me, quik is unnecessary
> > and undesirable.  I wish there were a more graceful way of telling the
> > installer that I don't want quik, but allowing it to try and fail does
> > the job, albeit messily.  It's certainly not worth holding up the
> > release over.
> The floppies install with DEBCONF_PRIORITY=expert, whereas the CDs use 
> DEBCONF_PRIORITY=low. At expert-level (or even at medium) you're asked 
> whether you want to install quik or not. IMHO the sensible default answer is 
> yes, because allmost all oldworld machines can boot from quik. 
> But maybe the priority should of that question should be lowered ? Or better: 
> if some hfs partitions are found (which are mandatory for bootx, right?), the 
> question wether quik should be installed, should be asked. If there are no 
> hfs-Partitions it's a safe bet to install quik (on oldworld).
> A word to quik: on some models (i only know the 7200 for sure) quik installed 
> by d-i works "out-of-the-box". your beige g3 and my 4400 belong to those 
> models who suffer from certain known problems regarding open firmware and 
> quik. The problems on the 4400 are software fixable from within linux (see 
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2004/04/msg01130.html) , which is afaik 
> not true for the beige g3. 
> regards,
>  Holger

I've hashed over my reasons for preferring BootX to quik many times in
this forum, so I won't re-hash them again.

Your suggestion of making the priority of the "do you want to install
quik?" question depend on whether you have an HFS partition is a good
one, I think.  But probably for "after sarge" time-frame.



Reply to: