Re: Getting d-i to find firmware on the CD generated by debian-cd

2010-06-23 Thread Goswin von Brederlow
Steve McIntyre  writes:

> On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 03:17:08PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>>On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 06:58:52PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
>>
>>I've added code into debian-cd to generate images with firmware on the
>>first CD. Add "FORCE_FIRMWARE=1" in CONF.sh. I've also tweaked the
>>build scripts so that we'll start generating them. I can see that I've
>>got all the firmware debs in /firmware in the ISO, but I don't see any
>>feedback to suggest that the installer is picking up on them. Test
>>images available at

I haven't tested it but just from this short text you seem to be doing
it wrong.

>From memory you should add the debs to the normal repository structure
on the CD under non-free and in the Release file specify that the CD
carries main and non-free. Iirc you also need to list non-free in the DI
info file but I'm not sure. Last time I did this was by hand and when
lenny was frozen.

DI then sees that you have both main and non-free on the CD and reads
main/binary-arch/Packages and non-free/binary-arch/Packages and sees all
the firmware debs (same for udebs).

MfG
Goswin


-- 
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/874ogteuh0@frosties.localdomain



Re: Multi-arch netinst getting too big

2010-06-23 Thread Goswin von Brederlow
Steve McIntyre  writes:

> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 03:06:14PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
>>On Tue, 2010-06-15 at 14:30 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>>> For the last few builds, the i386/amd64/powerpc sid netinst image has
>>> become too big to fit on one CD any more. The following packages are
>>> falling off onto a second disk now:
>>> 
>>> i386:main:linux-image-2.6.32-5-686-bigmem:27213342
>>> i386:main:linux-image-2.6-686-bigmem:3036
>>> i386:main:linux-headers-2.6.32-5-686-bigmem:516338
>>> i386:main:linux-headers-2.6-686-bigmem:2930
>>
>>The linux-image ones were added to support installation into a Xen PV
>>domain and were added to this image precisely because it was one of the
>>few images which was considered to have room -- it would be a shame to
>>have to drop them.
>
> Hmmm, OK.
>
>>> http://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/daily-builds/sid_d-i/20100615-5/multi-arch/list-cd/debian-testing-amd64-i386-powerpc-netinst.list.gz
>>> 
>>> in case anybody wants to take a look and suggest things...
>>
>>I'm afraid I don't have any good ideas. Is this particular image
>>supposed to contain a complete base system or just enough to fetch the
>>remainder of the base system from the net?
>
> The netinsts are meant to have the base system, yes. I can't see
> anything obvious myself that we can drop. Maybe time to give up on
> powerpc on that image, like we've done on the m-a DVD. Shame, but
> there's only so much stuff we can accommodate here. Anybody else have
> an opinion here? Frans/Joey?

Just a crcy idea: Could the plain i386 kernel be droped instead? That
would loose support for i486 and i586 cpus on the m-a CD. But is that
needed there?

MfG
Goswin


-- 
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/87zkyldfr8@frosties.localdomain



Bug#586959: boot fails after install on softRAID because of superblock v1.2

2010-06-23 Thread Nebojsa Trpkovic
Package: installation-reports
Version: 20100621
Severity: important

Squeeze x86 daily snapshot netinstall CDs and weekly snapshot CD during
install make softRAIDs with superblock version 1.2.
Current Squeeze kernel (2.6.32-5-686) is unable to assemble that kind of
softRAID during boot. That makes installations with /root on softRAID
unbootable. Same situation should be expected with superblock 1.0 and 1.1.
Making /boot separate non-RAIDed partition doesn't help because /root
cannot be assembled.
I was using RAID1, but I guess there's the same problem with other RAID
levels, too.

I suggest to make using of superblock 1.2 optional providing superblock
0.9 as default at least for /boot and /root partitions.




-- 
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/4c22908d.6020...@trpkovic.com