On Tue 02 Dec 2014 at 18:37:04 -0500, Miles Fidelman wrote: > Brian wrote: > >On Tue 02 Dec 2014 at 16:52:46 -0500, Miles Fidelman wrote: > > > >>Brian wrote: > >>>On Wed 03 Dec 2014 at 02:27:26 +1100, Scott Ferguson wrote: > >>> > >>>>>Do you have a citation for this? > >>>>I'm glad you asked. > >>>>No - I "presumed" that amongst the "lots" of experts so opposed to the > >>>>late-command option, at least one of them would apply Kenshi's patch > >>>>(which apparently works) to d-i. Was my mistake an assumption that any > >>>>of them would do more than demand? (have any of them even, including > >>>>one of the noisier posters on this list who commented in that thread, > >>>>done any of the bug-tested he widely requested?) > >>>You do us a service by raising this. > >>> > >>>We are lead to believe there is a huge number of people who want to > >>>preseed d-i to have a "clean install". Not one person on -user or -devel > >>>has indicated any success with using the patch or given any detail which > >>>would allow anyone to follow in their footsteps and test it. > >>> > >>>Why not? Is it so difficult? Is it beyond the capabilities of a user > >>>with technical skills? Looks like half an hour's work to me. Those who > >>>have a vested interest in the issue seem reluctant to turn "apparently > >>>works" into "does work" or "does not work". > >>> > >>>Until we get some testing and substantial feedback, using this patch to > >>>beat the anti-systemd drum should be seen as noise. > >>> > >>Well, actually, it does involve a little more than downloading > >>debootstrap, applying the patch, and compiling. One has to build a > >>custom copy of d-i to actually make use of it. That's bit of a > >>complicated procedure. > >Why does debootstrap have to be downloaded and a custom copy of d-i > >built? Suppose the patch were applied to debootstrap in a running d-i. > >Why wouldn't that be sufficient for testing? > > > >That's a straightforward technical question, incidentally. > > Also a straightforward technical question: How would one actually do that?
I think I asked my question first. :) > It looks to me like d-i starts up, then pulls in debootstrap and > starts it running. I've spent a little bit of time looking at how Debootstrap only runs when the base system is installed. I assume it runs whatever is in /usr/sbin and /usr/share/debootstrap. Now - what happens if you alter these files before installing the base system? > d-i figures out where to look for debootstrap, and got to the point > of concluding that I either had to put the patched debootstrap in > the repo (not going to happen) or build a customized d-i that looks > for the patched debootstrap somewhere else. That's the point at > which I decided that, not being much of a c coder, I really didn't > want to mess with things. > > If you have a straightforward suggestion, please.... Debootstrap is mainly a bunch of scripts. The patch is applied to the scripts. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/03122014002004.ff86083b4...@desktop.copernicus.demon.co.uk
