"Warning" failure in chroot . . .
REPLY INLINE
Mark Pictor wrote:
Well I guess I'm gonna reply to two people at once...
--- "David A. Cobb" <Superbiskit@cox.net> wrote:
<>Not a very successful day!!!
Trying to go with the fact that TUN driver sees my
network controller.
Two occurrences of "Warning" Failure trying to run
<>Warning *doesn't* mean failure... and having to use
<><>--force is a bad sign. Are you sure you're doing it
<>the right way? (I can't recommend anything, not sure
<>what you are doing.)
<>
Which makes two of us. Anyway, I'm just quoting what's in the message
that pops up. The whole thing is from the installer. And it is a
Failure because immediately DEBOOTSTRAP exits with Error Return-Code 1.
I see I wasn't very clear: the DEBOOTSTRAP error is constant. Twice it
was preceded by the "Warning" Failure . . . message.
chroot /target dpkg --force-depends \
/var/cache/apt/archives/base-files_3.0.2_i386.deb \
(same basepath)/base-passwd_3.4.1_i386.deb
and several more where all I get is "debootstrap
exited with an
error (return code 1)"
I was getting the debootstrap errors before, seeming
to be related to
the way I mounted my partitions.
??? Once you've got things set up, you should use
/etc/fstab - try 'nano /etc/fstab' as root, to edit
it.
for one-time mounts, use 'mount -t vfat /dev/hda1
/mnt/windows' where hda1 is a partition [1], and
/mnt/windows is an empty folder which you have
permissions for. You must be root to use mount this
way.
Ur, Yeah. I'm doing the install from CD's. I start out by Initializing
and mounting partitions into which the new system is to be installed.
In my first attempt, it seemed some bad selections on what to mount
where led to problems -- at least the problems went away when I stopped
trying to be so damn clever. The only thing I'm doing that isn't a
simple agreement with the script suggestions is mounting a 2Gb partition
for /tmp, instead of leaving it in the rather undersized primary (/)
partition. Undersized is relative -- about 1Gb. I have 12Gb for /var
and 8Gb for /usr.
See comments above, and [1] below.
To make sure your kernel can use it, (-bf24 almost
certainly can) type 'cat /proc/filesystems' and read
the output... one of the lines should be vfat, which
is fat32/long file names.
A-Ha! Yes, they mount fine. As I say somewhere above, some early
failures led me to the erroneous conclusion that VFAT wasn't functional.
<>PLEASE don't tell me that the evil beast of Redmond has buried
VFAT under a patent claim!!
They are trying!!!
Not surprised. Microsoft delenda est!
It might be... if you have a spare hard disk laying
around, I would do an install on it, and work out the
kinks/practice... If you haven't done much
personalization or got much data on the debian
partition, I would just erase it and try again.
Practice, that I'm getting. It's good for my soul to learn to control
my frustration. Or something like that.
Sure, we all have a spare HD laying around.
[1] partitions - use something like cfdisk to find out
which number corresponds to which partition;
alternately just go through the numbers (hda1 thru
hda9) until you don't get an error that it isn't vfat,
then do 'ls /mnt/windows' and see if everything looks
right.
Actually easier than that: there's a menu choice in the installer for
"VIEW PARTITION TABLE" If I could get it into a text file I could post
the results here. I can probably do a df to get it, using the ash shell
on the CD.
--
David A. Cobb, Software Engineer, Public Access Advocate
"By God's Grace, I am a Christian man; by my actions a great sinner." -- The Way of a Pilgrim: R.French, Tr.
Life is too short to tolerate crappy software!
begin:vcard
fn:David A. Cobb
n:Cobb;David A.
adr:;;7 Lenox Av #1;West Warwick;RI;02893-3918;USA
email;internet:Superbiskit@cox.net
title:Independent Software Consultant
note:PGP Key ID#0x4C293929 effective 01/28/2004
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
version:2.1
end:vcard
Reply to: