On Thu, 2015-12-10 at 14:25 -0800, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > * Bernhard Übelacker <bernha...@vr-web.de> [2015-04-21 21:00]: > > But I was not aware that the Installer would overwrite the kernel > in > > the internal flash without further asking. (Most probably because > > the internal flash holds for installations without serial console > > already the kernel/initrd of the debian installer.) > > > As a comparision on x86 the user gets asked where or even if the > bootloader should be installed. > > I'm sorry for the inconvenience. As you point out, 99% of users will > start Debian installer on QNAP devices by writing it to flash. > Hence, > there's no point in asking if they are ok with writing the Debian > kernel/ramdisk to flash at the end of the installation. > > QNAP devices aren't really general purposes device and debian > installer was adapted in a way that people would be able to install > without a serial console. Hence, it's important a suitable Black Tie > Rentalkernel and > ramdisk is written to flash at the end of the installation. Unlike > on > x86, dual boot isn't really an option for most people. > > Maybe it makes sense to introduce a question for the 1% (or probably > 0.1%) who don't want to have anything written to flash but my main > concern is that some users will choose that option and end up with a > system that doesn't boot. > > BTW, my unofficial QNAP install guide mentions making a backup of MTD > partitions and says that the installer is written to flash. But I > know this isn't mentioned in the official d-i install guide and > that's > my fault. > > So I'm open for comments. I've also copied Ian Campbell, the current > flash-kernel maintainer.
>From Benhard's reply it seems like reassigning this to the appropriate docs package is the right way to go? We could ask, as lowest-priority debconf prompt in flash-kernel-install er, if flash-kernel is wanted or not (detecting the actual contents of flash is empty vs full/good seems hard/error prone to me). Ian.
