A Quarta 08 Dezembro 2010 23:28:52, você escreveu: > Hi Miguel, > I have gone the logs on your suggestion (initially was too lazy to > crawl syslog, SIGH). I should have seen it earlier ...
thanks for analyzing the installation logs. > > From syslog, it seem something got wrong on the network so the packages > were not downloaded. > (I am pretty sure it was not a permanent error as I was browsing the net > all that time through the same router/switch) > > Here it goes: > [code] > Dec 7 03:33:13 in-target: Get:970 > ftp://ftp.sk.debian.org/debian/squeeze/main ntfs-3g i386 1:2010.3.6-1 > [63.8 kB] > Dec 7 03:33:13 kernel: [ 4842.663844] eth0: Transmit error, Tx status > register 90. > Dec 7 03:33:13 kernel: [ 4842.664070] eth0: Transmit error, Tx status > register c0. > Dec 7 03:35:13 in-target: Err > ftp://ftp.sk.debian.org/debian/squeeze/main ntfs-3g i386 1:2010.3.6-1 > Dec 7 03:35:13 in-target: Data socket timed out > Dec 7 03:35:22 in-target: Err > ftp://ftp.sk.debian.org/debian/squeeze/main ntfsprogs i386 2.0.0-1+b1 > [/code] quoting linux-2.6-2-6-32/Documentation/networking/vortex.txt: Transmit error, Tx status register 82 ------------------------------------- This is a common error which is almost always caused by another host on the same network being in full-duplex mode, while this host is in half-duplex mode. You need to find that other host and make it run in half-duplex mode or fix this host to run in full-duplex mode. As a last resort, you can force the 3c59x driver into full-duplex mode with options 3c59x full_duplex=1 but this has to be viewed as a workaround for broken network gear and should only really be used for equipment which cannot autonegotiate. I suggest you install again passing the option to the module to use full duplex: (5.3.1.2 on http://d-i.alioth.debian.org/manual/en.i386/ch05s03.html) 3c509.full_duplex=1 ...or try with all hosts as half-duplex if using that NIC. > > > It seems to me the installer error-handling can use some improvement. > What bothers me most is the silent failure - which to most inexperienced > user will "indicate" Debian/Linux's immaturity. I found a related BR, #579520, on tasksel package. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=579520 If it's the correct package for this, i suggest the discussion to be kept in it instead of ending up with several BRs for the same issue. > > I am using GUI or basic installer, so the suggestion belove is for > Expert mode. But the general idea shall be plausible across the board. > > Here it is: > ---------------------- > > >>First stage = only detect and report issue > > 1) The installer will notify the user that (some) package downloads > failed > - just writing it into syslog is not enough (who watches that screen > anyway...) > > >>Second stage = attempt optimistic autocorrection + alow for manual > > auto correction) > > 2) To solve intermittend networks issues, Debian-installer shall > (automatically) try at least twice to call for installing of the > packages in case of errors (be it network or other) > - this should be trivial to achieve - apt will anyway ignore everything > that is allready installed, so calling it twice is a no-brainer > - it is actually desirable to do it this way - the delay in APT > installing what was installer shall provide for time shinf that may > suffice to mittigate the connection issue > - in case a dual run was needed (and second run was flawless), user > just needs be notified of issues (even though they were worked around) > > 3) In case multi-run of apt is not sufficient to solve all problems, > user shall be prompted to take appropriate measures to resolve the > situation > - dialog box with options like: > - - a) repair issue (now) and try again > - - b) repair issue later and reboot into the system > - - c) repair issue later and perform a cleanup to remove orphaned > packages (to ensure clean state if only a dependency got installed but > the parent package was not) > > >>Third stage = provide the user with a list of packages affected > > 4) When the above (IMO easy to implement) features are there, there > should be a serious thought given to actually providing a list of > "broken/not-installed" packages in a (file) format suitable as input for > apt for alter use > - until this is available, user shall be directed > to /var/log/installer/syslog > > >>Optional addon > > 5) Actually provide user with two lists as in 4) but of all packages: > - designated for installation by Debian-installer > - installed correctly > So for every installation, succesfull or not, user will get 3 package > list with, hopefully, one zero-file while the other 2 identical. > > > Yeah I know I am newbie here and now work done, but sometimes even an > idea can have a non-zero value so here it is :) > > > If you'd like to check the box, let me know until it's clean. > > > Best regards, > Milan Niznansky > > On Wed, 2010-12-08 at 18:55 +0000, Miguel Figueiredo wrote: > > Hi, > > > > A Terça 07 Dezembro 2010 10:38:31 Milan Niznansky você escreveu: > > > re-fill of initially missed check-boxes, see uncommented lines > > > > > > On Tue, 2010-12-07 at 10:39 +0100, Milan Niznansky wrote: > > > > Package: installation-reports > > > > Severity: important > > > > Tags: d-i > > > > > > > > Run a mostly default "Expert Install" with no custom options worth > > > > mentioning. Left defaults in software slection (Desktop + System > > > > utils) and selected also SSH server. > > > > Installtion ran through without a hitch. No X server got installed > > > > though. I was just greeted with "/usr/bin/X: not found" after trying > > > > "startx"... > > > > Found anything 'suspicious' on the installation log? > > Can you share the installation log (gzipped!) ? -- Melhores cumprimentos/Best regards, Miguel Figueiredo http://www.DebianPT.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201012121245.48634.el...@debianpt.org
