Bug#79950: marked as done (updating to potato from Linux2.0.34( i believe it was hamm))
Your message dated Wed, 20 Dec 2000 11:58:02 +0100 (CET)
with message-id <Pine.LNX.3.96.1001220114443.29615A-100000@panic.et.tudelft.nl>
and subject line Bug#79950: updating to potato from Linux2.0.34( i believe it was hamm)
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.)
Darren Benham
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 19 Dec 2000 01:45:11 +0000
>From basic@op.net Mon Dec 18 19:45:11 2000
Return-path: <basic@op.net>
Received: from renoir.op.net [207.29.195.4] (root)
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 148Bq3-0007HK-00; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 19:45:11 -0600
Received: from stan (mail@d-bm4-0e.ppp.op.net [209.152.194.110]) by renoir.op.net (o1/$Revision: 1.18 $) with ESMTP id UAA15097 for <submit@bugs.debian.org>; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 20:45:09 -0500 (EST)
Received: from basic by stan with local (Exim 2.05 #1 (Debian))
id 148A8t-0000E1-00; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 18:56:31 -0500
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 18:56:31 -0500
From: basic <basic@Op.Net>
To: submit@bugs.debian.org
Subject: updating to potato from Linux2.0.34( i believe it was hamm)
Message-ID: <20001218185631.A853@stan.stan>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.3i
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
package: apt-get update off a cdrom
i have a three set cdrom which i purchased from linux central.
in the middle of the second cdrom , i received this message:
errors were encountered while processing /cdrom/dists/potato/main/
binary-i386/shell/pdhsh_5.2.14-1.deb (--unpack)
subprocess dpkg-deb --fsys-tarfile returned error exit status 2
errors were encountered while processing /cdrom/dists/potato/main/
binary-i386/shell/pdhsh_5.2.14-1.deb
E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)
**end of message **
the system appeared hung. i tried to reboot the system.
everything appeared to be going OK until the boot process tried to load
modules. it had modules that were all over the place, such as raid disks,
and many that i would never use. when it tried to load the module for SCSI
drives which this computer does not have, the system died. i must now install
a new system.
truly,
sandy basickes basic@op.net
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 79950-done) by bugs.debian.org; 20 Dec 2000 10:58:05 +0000
>From costar@panic.et.tudelft.nl Wed Dec 20 04:58:05 2000
Return-path: <costar@panic.et.tudelft.nl>
Received: from panic.et.tudelft.nl [130.161.36.86] (root)
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 148gwe-0007Zd-00; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 04:58:05 -0600
Received: from localhost (costar@localhost)
by panic.et.tudelft.nl (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian/GNU) with SMTP id LAA32225
for <79950-done@bugs.debian.org>; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 11:58:02 +0100
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 11:58:02 +0100 (CET)
From: "J.A. Bezemer" <costar@panic.et.tudelft.nl>
To: 79950-done@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#79950: updating to potato from Linux2.0.34( i believe it was hamm)
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.96.1001220114443.29615A-100000@panic.et.tudelft.nl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Delivered-To: 79950-done@bugs.debian.org
Hi!
It is a known problem that pdksh_5.2.14-1.deb on old 2.2 rev0 CDs has a
one-bit error. More information and a fix is available at
http://cdimage.debian.org/lastmin.html
I don't think this could have caused your system to become unbootable (unless
you use ksh in startup scripts and/or have /bin/sh symlinked to ksh, both of
which probably are bad things). Therefore I'm closing this ksh/CDs-related
bug; if you figure out what made your system unbootable (and it turns out not
to be a user error), you'd better file a new bug against the offending package
with more info.
Regards,
Anne Bezemer
Reply to: