Re: image download with jigdo
On 01/09/2014 03:41 PM, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 03:25:48PM +0100, Klaus Jantzen wrote:
>> On 01/09/2014 01:59 PM, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> I successfully used jigdo-lite to generate an image for
>>>>
>>>> debian-7.3.0-amd64-DVD-10 and for
>>>> debian-update-7.3.0-amd64-DVD-1
>>>>
>>>> I also successfully burned the appropriate DVDs.
>>>>
>>>> The only problem is, they do not start when starting or restarting the
>>>> PC. (The boot sequence is correctly set so that the dvd drive is tried
>>>> first).
>>>>
>>>> Is there anything I could have done incorrectly?
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> You've quite probably downloaded and burnt them correctly. It's just
>>> that neither of those images is *meant* to be bootable. That's your
>>> problem. If you want to boot an installation DVD, you want
>>> debian-7.3.0-amd64-DVD-1 (i.e. the first in the sequence).
Where could I have found the information about this essential difference?
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for the quick reply with the essential information.
>>
>> Then what would one do with the image thus created?
>
> The images you have created are for use only alongside other discs in
> a set; they contain extra packages that you could add to your system
> via "apt-cdrom add; apt-get install $package".
The installation manual does not say that.
In the description of the various possibilities of downloading debian
there is the section where the production of the jigdo-iso-image is
described. At the end it directs the reader to the installation manual.
There nothing is said about the difference between using a 'normal'
bootable iso image and using the jigdo-iso-image.
Thus I assumed they are equivalent.
>
>> For me that seems to be too much hassle, so I downloaded the netinstall
>> cd and that works.
>
> OK... The netinst *is* designed to be bootable and it contains the
> Debian installer and a small set of packages: the base system. DVD-1
> contains the installer a larger set of packages. That's the only real
> difference.
>
Thanks anyway.
--
K.D.J.
Reply to: