Your message dated Fri, 11 Jun 2004 19:53:42 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line processing report
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 26 Jan 2004 08:50:32 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Jan 26 00:50:32 2004
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from tobus.biz (tobus.hagk.net) [217.160.218.132]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1Al2S0-0004Ey-00; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 00:50:32 -0800
Received: from amavis by tobus.hagk.net with no-scan (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
id 1Al2Rv-0000Gc-00
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 09:50:27 +0100
X-Scanned-By: AMaViS-ng at http://tobus.hagk.net
Received: from dsl-082-083-227-162.arcor-ip.net ([82.83.227.162] helo=fuchi.local)
by tobus.hagk.net with asmtp
(Cipher TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
id 1Al2Rt-0000GJ-00; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 09:50:25 +0100
Received: from shensche by fuchi.local with local (Exim 4.30)
id 1Al2RE-0002bT-Ge; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 09:49:44 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Sebastian Henschel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: installation-reports: installation asus m2400n with scsi drive attached
X-Mailer: reportbug 2.37
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 09:49:44 +0100
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS-ng
X-BadReturnPath: [EMAIL PROTECTED] rewritten as [EMAIL PROTECTED]
using "From" header
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_01_25
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.0 required=4.0 tests=HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no
version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_01_25
X-Spam-Level:
Package: installation-reports
Version: beta2
Severity: normal
INSTALL REPORT
Debian-installer-version:
http://people.debian.org/cdimage/testing/netinst/i386/beta2/sarge-i386-netinst.iso
uname -a: Linux debian 2.4.22-1-386 #9 Sat Oct 4 14:30:39 EST 2003 i686 unknown
Date: 2004-01-20 10.30h (GMT+1)
Method: Booted from CD and installed base from it. the rest was downloaded
automatically via
Machine: ASUS M2400N
Processor: Pentium-M
Memory: 256 MB
Root Device: /dev/sda (external usb 2.0 drive; had to load ehci-hcd by hand)
Root Size/partition table:
Output of lspci:
Base System Installation Checklist:
Initial boot worked: [O]
Configure network HW: [O]
Config network: [O]
Detect CD: [O]
Load installer modules: [O]
Detect hard drives: [E]
Partition hard drives: [E]
Create file systems: [O]
Mount partitions: [O]
Install base system: [O]
Install boot loader: [O]
Reboot: [O]
[O] = OK, [E] = Error (please elaborate below), [ ] = didn't try it
Comments/Problems:
- detect hard drives:
after loading ehci-hcd, the hardware detection had to be rerun. then i was
prompted to choose from the existing partitions on the scsi-drive. it seemed
like the ide-drive had vanished. only after cancelling the process, i got
back to the menu and was able to choose "partition hard drives", where both,
ide- and scsi-drive, appeared. "partition hard drives" was skipped after the
partitions had been found on the scsi-drive, while the ide-drive had no
partitions at all (factory clean).
- partition hard drives:
i wonder about the use of "finish" and "cancel" (dunno exactly the english
terms used here, since german was chosen as install language). "cancel" is
somewhat the same like "prev" and "finish" is somewhat the same like "next"
which already exist on the bottom of the page.
- install boot loader:
+ for the translation team (german), there is an inconsistency:
installation des bootloaders lilo...
+ also there should be an example what should be typed into the field in
case some user does not want the boot sector to be installed in the mbr.
people unfamiliar with devfs do not know what to type in, then.
- booting new system:
this somewhat failed.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: powerpc
Kernel: Linux fuchi 2.6.1-ben1-mh2 #1 Wed Jan 14 16:57:43 CET 2004 ppc
Locale: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 229733-done) by bugs.debian.org; 12 Jun 2004 00:09:17 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Jun 11 17:09:17 2004
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from kitenet.net [64.62.161.42] (postfix)
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1BYw5F-0000ov-00; Fri, 11 Jun 2004 17:09:17 -0700
Received: from dragon.kitenet.net (216-98-95-250.access.naxs.com [216.98.95.250])
(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
(Client CN "Joey Hess", Issuer "Joey Hess" (verified OK))
by kitenet.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8937187B3
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sat, 12 Jun 2004 00:09:13 +0000 (GMT)
Received: by dragon.kitenet.net (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id 4321A6EC39; Fri, 11 Jun 2004 19:53:42 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 19:53:42 -0400
From: Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: processing report
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="UugvWAfsgieZRqgk"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040523i
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no
version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
X-Spam-Level:
--UugvWAfsgieZRqgk
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I'm processing old installation reports, and have, finally, gotten to
yours. Thanks for talking the time to file an installation report.
I'm closing your installation report, after determining that:
- Some problems you reported are no longer present in current versions of t=
he
installer.
If you can, please try installing again using a current version of the
debian installer. I recommend the tc1 release, which you can find on our
web page, <http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-installer/>. If you can, try
to reproduce the problems you reported using it, so we can verify that
they're all fixed. We look forward to your new installation report.
--=20
see shy jo
--UugvWAfsgieZRqgk
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFAykYFd8HHehbQuO8RAmoSAKDj0H/KdmgbWAg6Qgc9+o5ujqzsEwCeOTZd
4aXnXumOl9bjiS397fyLCYg=
=Mj+B
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--UugvWAfsgieZRqgk--
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
