Bug#1036952: rootskel: text installs on aarch64 lack glyphs for many languages
Hi,
On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 09:08:45PM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Philip Hands <phil@hands.com> (2023-05-30):
> > Apparently, this MR fixes the problem:
> >
> > https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/rootskel/-/merge_requests/8
> >
> > Although this does prompt the question of why aarch64 has TERM set to
> > 'vt102' at this point, rather than 'linux'.
>
> Glancing at the merge request earlier, my first (intertwined) questions
> were:
>
> 1. Why is aarch64 special here?
> 2. Where does that difference come from?
According to Jessica Clarke this is due to busybox using vt102:
https://society.oftrolls.com/@jrtc27@mastodon.social/110459684352427882
> 3. Which other architectures might be impacted if we were to change
> that?
I'm not sure, and I haven't tested the S40term-linux patch yet. However I can
report that booting the installer by passing console=tty0 to the kernel fixes
the problem (thanks alpernebbi!).
Which of the two changes (console=tty0 vs S40term-linux patch) is less risky?
Reply to: