Bug#252672: marked as done (Package: installation-reports)
Your message dated Wed, 08 Sep 2010 03:58:39 +0000
with message-id <E1OtBnz-000633-42@ravel.debian.org>
and subject line Closing old installation report #252672
has caused the Debian Bug report #252672,
regarding Package: installation-reports
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 this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
252672: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=252672
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: installation-reports
Debian-installer-version: Debian GNU/Linux testing "Sarge" - Official
NetInst Snapshot i386 Binary-1 (20040315)uname -a: -
Date: April 24, 2004
Method: Boot and install directly from CD
Machine: Homebuilt w Matsonic MS7016S mb
Processor: Celeron 366
Memory: 256Mb
Root Device: IDE Seagate 80Gb
Root Size/partition table:
Output of lspci:
Base System Installation Checklist:
Initial boot worked: [ ]
Configure network HW: [O]
Config network: [E]
Detect CD: [O]
Load installer modules: [O]
Detect hard drives: [O]
Partition hard drives: [E]
Create file systems: [ ]
Mount partitions: [O]
Install base system: [O]
Install boot loader: [E]
Reboot: [ ]
[O] = OK, [E] = Error (please elaborate below), [ ] = didn't try it
Comments/Problems:
"Configure the Network"
- The text reads "In rare circumstances, you may have no router, in that
case you can leave this blank."
- I left the box blank and I received the error message "Malformed IP
address"
"Partition disks" errors
I had previously partitioned my disk using cfdisk without any problems or
errors. According to the fdisk man page, cfdisk is the preferred
partitioning tool under linux followed by fdisk followed by parted. I also
inferred that preferred also meant safest.' Consequently, I was not actually
trying to re-partition my disk but was rather informing the installer (or so
I thought) of my current layout and how I planned to use it. Everthing
seemed to be going well until the time came to actually confirm/partition my
disk when I received the message that my disk "has a rather strange layout"
and so the disk cannot be resized(!) without errors. Since this is not the
first time I have had an installer tell me this with the various
configurations I have had -- I received a previous error from Mandrake's
Disk Druid that said essentially the same thing -- I did not worry too much
about it.
After the paritioning problems I went to the command line ran mkreiserfs on
my target partition and mounted it under /TARGET and then returned to the
menu. When I selected "Install Base System" I received another error
"/usr/sbin/mkinitrd: cannot determine root device." I figured that I could
always use a different kernel image + initrd copied over from somewhere
else.
"Partition disks, Method for using this partition"
- It would be a nice feature if the text displayed the name of the partition
in question -- e.g. /dev/hda6
"Install a bootloader"
I have been using Grub without any problems and it was already installed and
therefore I had initially chosen NOT to install a bootloader. At some time
during the install after the partition error mentioned above, I changed my
mind, however. I selected the "Install Grub" menu item but was then taken
back into the "Partition disks" dialogue! Since when does GRUB depend on a
harddisk layout created by parted? This seems to me a bad dependency.
Never-the-less, I figured that I could do the same using the shell but I was
mistaken: I could not find grub or the grub-installer anywhere in the root
filesystem accessible to me.
Comment on the use of Devfs
According to what I have read, devfs is deprecated in favor of udev+sysfs. I
was a fan of devfs until I read the udev developer's account so I would have
been all for the move to incorporate devfs in the installer up until a few
months ago. However, it seems to me that if devfs is used in the installer
then the devices should at least be mapped to standard names so I don't have
to do /dev/discs/disc0/ etc. to get to /dev/hda6.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tollef Fog Heen <mailto:tfheen@debian.org>
Last modified: Sun Dec 8 00:01:34 CET 2002
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
We are closing this installation report for one of the following
reasons:
- it was reported with a pre-lenny version of Debian
Installer.
- indications in the installation report give the feeling that
the reported problem waslying in another software, unrelated to
D-I, which we can't easily identify.
- indications in the installation report suggest that it may have been
fixed in a more recent version of a D-I component
- it was successful and we forgot closing it..:-)
- it has no information we consider useful
The D-I team is currently in the process of cleaning out the old spool
of installation reports that haven't bene processed yet.
In case you think that the problem you reported has chances to be
still present, please reiterate your installation test with
a more recent image of D-I, if you're in position of doing this.
You'll find daily builds at
http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-installer. We recommend you choose
the netboot image, in the "daily builds section", then choose to
install "squeeze" when prompted.
If some problems are found, please report them with a new bug sent
against installation-reports.
Many thanks for your understanding and your help improving Debian,
past and present.
--- End Message ---
Reply to: