[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Booting Debian/testing fails

On Sat, Feb 03, 2007 at 08:03:02AM -0500, hendrik@topoi.pooq.com wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 03, 2007 at 12:57:09AM -0500, Kevin Mark wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 08:40:02PM -0500, Douglas Allan Tutty wrote:
> > > > > wouldn't consider a *N*X are doing so.  And they're not prepared.  
> > > > 
> > > > so in other words... its a good thing! 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Yes.  It tells us that our documentation isn't up to their needs.
> > > 
> > > Doug.
> > Well, I'd say that the value of 'their' has progressively been changing
> > to be an ever more less expeirenced group of users.
> Well, I've been using Linux for five years -- at least -- I've lost 
> count -- with various distros (starting frome when slackware was just 
> starting to be installed from CDROM instead of floppies), have settled 
> on Debian, and are tempted by Gentoo.  I don't find the documentation up 
> to *my* needs.  Or else maybe I stil don't know where to find it.
> For example, where do you find details on why rescue mode, swapped hard 
> drives (/dev/hda <-> /dev/hdc) when I asked it to start a shell in the 
> context of my root partition but not when I asked it to start a shell in 
> the installer context?  In fact running fdisk /dev/hda in the root 
> context showed me a perfect partition table for /dev/hdc, except that 
> all the partitions were labelled as being on /dev/hda.
> Now I know the boot-loaders have provisions for swapping hard-drive 
> letters.  But why were they invoked?
> This is the kind of detail that needs to be documented.  And access to 
> wource code is no longer a solution, even for experienced programmers -- 
> there's just too much undocumented context for each piece of the 
> hundred-million-odd lines of code that constitute Debian that that's 
> only practical for specialists in the particular subsystem under 
> investigation.
> I've considered switching to Gentoo, because some of their advocates say 
> their distribution is strong on documentation, but I suspect that they 
> mey not be a lot better.

Do you need to know the _why_ of that, or would you have liked a
heads-up and what to do about it?

The _why_ may be a complicated technical answer usable only to those
working on coding the installer (or the kernel).  The
what-to-do-about-it should be simple for someone who has dealt with it
to explain.


Reply to: