On 2014-01-01 05:05:18, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote: > On 31.12.2013 15:50, Antoine Beaupré wrote: >> (That resize, btw, was quite scary - I am not sure I did it right. First >> off it was very fast, so I suspect only the boundaries of the filesystem >> were changed, without telling NTFS. Then when we rebooted into Windows >> 7, it did a disk check which thankfully worked fine and it seems the >> Windows install is okay. But I can't think of doing this on an older >> system - it would have probably destroyed data, which is not clearly >> stated in partman. > > The resize usually is relatively fast, if the part you are removing from > the filesystem does not contain any data, because then no data has to be > moved and only the file system has to be updated to the new size. I > think chkdsk is always scheduled after a resize of NTFS, just to be on > the safe side. > This should also work perfectly fine on an older system, but there it > might take considerably longer, since the data is more likely to be > distributed over the whole partition. > Of course, one should always have backups of important data. Well, that's reassuring - I somehow thought only the partitions were resized, without telling the filesystem. Good job there! :) <voice style="crooked, old man">In myyyyy days, you had to to move bits around with a magnet to resize FAT12 partitions and NTFS was satan! You kids have it toooo easy.</voice> ;) >>> > The next missing thing was wifi. I tried installing firmware-linux- >>> > nonfree, but that wasn't enough - firmware-iwlwifi was the one that >>> > was required. >>> >>> The installer should install the correct firmware, if you have (on some >>> partition accessible during installation) a /firmware folder that >>> contains the unpacked firmware bundle, which can be downloaded from [2]. >>> But this is currently broken, see [3]. >> >> Understood. The weird thing is that the live image did find the wifi >> card without a problem, but it wasn't found after the install was done. > > Did you have a /firmware folder around? As you installed wheezy, this > should have worked, because it is only broken in jessie/sid. Yes, there was a firmware folder, it only contained a .deb of linux-firmware. >> Oh, and I forgot to mention that I had to remove this block for >> Network-Manager to properly pickup the wired interface: >> >> auto eth0 >> iface eth0 inet dhcp >> >> Otherwise it would say wired: not managed, which is strange to me... > > This is bug #724928 [1], which was fixed in the Wheezy 7.2 installer. That sounds familiar! I guess I need to update my image. ;) >> My user was expecting the "touch to click" to work out of the box, and >> we were worried this wasn't supported, and in fact it wasn't until gnome >> was installed (XFCE failed to configure it properly). >> >> This is especially annoying on this laptop because the buttons are >> completely part of the touchpad construction, so it's actually difficult >> to "click" without moving the mouse slightly. > > These seem to be bugs in xfce4 and gnome respectively. You should report > them there. It seems more users prefer this (see [2]) and I also do. Well, #2 is about a serious bug that makes unrelated things just not work when you enable "disable touchpad while typing". It seems to me this bug should be fixed, but it is not related to enabling the touch functionality on the... touch pad. ;) Probably not related to gnome only either... But I understand this is another serious bikeshed material and fold. :) >>> That being said, I think it really might be a good idea to install >>> plymouth by default, as 'novices' generally prefer it, and anyone who >>> wants to see the boot messages should have sufficient knowledge to >>> remove it. >> >> I totally agree with that. One thing I noticed with plymouth is that >> even when you install it, it doesn't properly configure grub, you still >> have to go around the grub config and (*gasp*) edit a weird >> configuration file! ;) >> >> I would have expected the plymouth postinst to configure grub >> automagically. :) But then that's more an issue with plymouth itself >> than the installer. > > You could report this as a bug in plymouth, but it is probably not > trivial to fix, because which configuration file has to be changed, > depends on which boot loader is used. Actually I'm not even sure it is > possible, because the boot loader may be installed after plymouth (as > the installer does), or it might be changed after plymouth is installed. Yeah, this seems to be a problem larger than plymouth actually. On the top of my head, fixing this would probably involve: * triggers * a way to hook into /etc/grub.d/10_linux to add boot parameters from outside * lots more bikeshedding Unless we make plymouth a hard dependency, which would probably involve around 1500 emails on -devel, so let's pretend I didn't say anything. ;) >> And anyways, those are probably things to keep in mind for Jessie more >> than Wheezy... > > Except for the already fixed issue, I agree. Happy new year! A. -- Antoine Beaupré +++ Réseau Koumbit Networks +++ +1.514.387.6262 #208 --------------------------------------------------------------------
Attachment:
pgpDTZEaDqujr.pgp
Description: PGP signature