Re: d-i 20030304 install report
On Wed, Apr 23, 2003 at 10:16:07AM +0200, Martin Sjögren wrote:
> mån 2003-03-24 klockan 07.11 skrev Chris Cheney:
> > The primary problem with the install was that kernel 2.4.20 doesn't
> > support my HPT372 properly. So I installed onto the VIA ide upgraded
> > the kernel and then moved the drive onto the HPT372. The kernel I
> > used was 2.4.21-pre5-ac3 so once 2.4.21 comes out this problem likely
> > will be resolved. Also on the disk I used (20030304) the install did
> > not save the updated /etc/network/interfaces file. Also that d-i
>
> Strange... That should definitely happen...
Well the kernel bug is known upstream, but the issue with the disk being
broken is due to the net install image not being updated since the
beginning of March (I think).
> > version only supported making ext2 partitions so I had to use the
> > console and use mkfs.ext3. Also mkswap was broken on that d-i
> > revision. Hopefully new images can be created soon, aiui the reason
> > they aren't currently is due to size being over 1440.
>
> Was the ext3 kernel module loaded? We cross-run /sbin/mkfs.* and
> /proc/filesystems and pick the ones that match both... The new tool
> (partconf) tries to probe for some file system modules before checking
> /proc/filesystems so this shouldn't be a problem.
I think this problem was related to it being an early March image as
well, but I am not really sure, its been nearly a month since I
installed it.
> > That is all the errors I can remember that I found, besides various
> > package bugs like Standard or higher packages depending on Optional
> > libs, etc.
>
> We don't have to follow policy. :P The idea is that libs should be
> optional and only pulled in by dependencies.
The packages in question were debian packages not d-i or udebs, and
they definitely have to follow policy. ;)
Section 2.2 (excerpt)
Packages must not depend on packages with lower priority values
(excluding build-time dependencies). In order to ensure this, the
priorities of one or more packages may need to be adjusted.
I will try to remember to make a list of packages that are violating
this when I do my next debian install (probably in June). I can't see
any just using a chroot though so they might have all been fixed since
last month.
Thanks,
Chris
Reply to: