Re: Installer - add BIOS boot partition?

[Lennart Sorensen]

On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 02:31:22PM +1300, Richard Hector wrote:
> That worked great, thanks. Though it seems the '1.0MB' free before my
> first partition wasn't big enough (or not aligned right?) so I had to
> start from scratch.
> 
> Incidentally, could/should I have made that RAID1? I created bios
> partitions on both my disks, and have grub-install-ed to both. The
> partitions do seem to be identical.

It might be possible to make it raid 1, although if you tell grub
to install to both of them, that should work fine, and in fact you
probably need that anyhow to get the bootstrap code into the MBR sector
on both disks.  I think you are fine the way it is.  That partition is
essentially an extension of the MBR sector for grub code so being per
disk makes sense.

And yes the partition tool won't let you create partitions that don't
start on a 1MB alignment, so even though there was enough room for a
partition there (of almost 1MB) it won't let you.  Not that loosing 1MB
is a big deal.  Having to start over probably wasn't that big a deal
either in this case.

-- 
Len Sorensen

Re: grub hangs at end of installing buster amd 64

[Steve McIntyre]

On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 03:24:48PM +0100, andrew u frank wrote:
>I install buster alpha10 from a medium i have used successfully 2 or 3 times
>before.
>
>The installation is on a x86_64 system and the installation runs smoothly. At
>the end, the grub hangs with
>
>    grub install on /dev/sdb  (sdb is my harddrive)
>
>I find on one of the terminals (alt-F4?) information which is repeated over
>and over:
>
>    xx not initialized in udev database
>
>and xx cycles through all partitions (especially the LVM partitions). I had
>setup the LVM before starting the installer and just selected three LVM
>partitions for / /home and swap. There was nothing irregular observed about
>the LVM system.

Right. Looks like a udev-related issue. I've seen the same thing on
some test installations last night, but it *everntually* finished
after a couple of minutes when I let it run. How long did you try for?

-- 
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com
"... the premise [is] that privacy is about hiding a wrong. It's not.
 Privacy is an inherent human right, and a requirement for maintaining
 the human condition with dignity and respect."
  -- Bruce Schneier

Re: grub hangs at end of installing buster amd 64

[Cyril Brulebois]

Steve McIntyre  (2019-01-11):
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 03:24:48PM +0100, andrew u frank wrote:
> >I had setup the LVM before starting the installer and just selected
> >three LVM partitions for / /home and swap. There was nothing
> >irregular observed about the LVM system.
> 
> Right. Looks like a udev-related issue. I've seen the same thing on
> some test installations last night, but it *everntually* finished
> after a couple of minutes when I let it run. How long did you try for?

https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/11314 by any chance?


Cheers,
-- 
Cyril Brulebois (k...@debian.org)
D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: grub hangs at end of installing buster amd 64

[Steve McIntyre]

On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 07:46:08PM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
>Steve McIntyre  (2019-01-11):
>> On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 03:24:48PM +0100, andrew u frank wrote:
>> >I had setup the LVM before starting the installer and just selected
>> >three LVM partitions for / /home and swap. There was nothing
>> >irregular observed about the LVM system.
>> 
>> Right. Looks like a udev-related issue. I've seen the same thing on
>> some test installations last night, but it *everntually* finished
>> after a couple of minutes when I let it run. How long did you try for?
>
>https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/11314 by any chance?

Could well be, yes. :-/

-- 
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com
There's no sensation to compare with this
Suspended animation, A state of bliss

Bug#870448: hw-detect - stop using modprobe -l

[Holger Wansing]

Hi,

Vincent McIntyre  wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 07:58:05PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Wed, 2017-08-02 at 12:26 +1000, Vincent McIntyre wrote:
> > > Package: hw-detect
> > > Version: 1.124
> > > Severity: normal
> > > Tags: patch
> > > 
> > > I keep seeing this in installer logs, back to jessie.
> > > 
> > > Aug  2 01:52:11 main-menu[193]: (process:224): modprobe: invalid option 
> > > -- 'l'
> > > 
> > > 
> > > I rated this normal rather than minor because the way it is working
> > > now the is_available() function always returns 1 (failure)
> > > 
> > > My suggestion is to use modinfo instead.
> > > This will return multiline output inside the quotes but
> > > a couple of tests suggests that is ok.
> > > It does fail with some modules (nvidia), not sure if we care.
> > >
> > > diff --git a/hw-detect.sh b/hw-detect.sh
> > > index 7977814..d8196c1 100755
> > > --- a/hw-detect.sh
> > > +++ b/hw-detect.sh
> > > @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ is_not_loaded() {
> > >  }
> > >  
> > >  is_available () {
> > > -   [ "$(modprobe -l $1)" ] || return 1
> > > +   [ "$(modinfo $1)" ] || return 1
> > >  }
> > 
> > But this still prints error messages for missing modules.  I think the
> > function should be implemented as:
> > 
> > is_available () {
> > modprobe -qn "$1"
> > }
> > 
> 
> That seems much better, can someone please apply Ben's version?
> Thanks for tickling this Holger.

Any objections against this?

Holger



-- 
Holger Wansing 
PGP-Finterprint: 496A C6E8 1442 4B34 8508  3529 59F1 87CA 156E B076

Bug#919023: Simplification of BOOTCFG_CreateGUID function

[Thomas Gaugler]

Package: win32-loader
Version: 0.9.3
Severity: normal
Tags: patch

The conversion of an UUID value into a string can be achieved by just 
using the g (GUID) type of the System plug-in. As a consequence the 
Win32 API calls could be eliminated.


-- System Information:
Debian Release: 9.6
  APT prefers stable-updates
  APT policy: (500, 'stable-updates'), (500, 'stable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386

Kernel: Linux 4.18.0-0.bpo.3-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), 
LANGUAGE=en_US:en (charmap=UTF-8)

Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)

win32-loader depends on no packages.

win32-loader recommends no packages.

Versions of packages win32-loader suggests:
pn  wine  
>From e735da16c5059c680d279a00de8cdf3c0e1bf53e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Thomas Gaugler 
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2019 22:04:52 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Simplification of BOOTCFG_CreateGUID function

The conversion of an UUID value into a string can be achieved by just using the g (GUID) type of the System plug-in. As a consequence the Win32 API calls could be eliminated.
---
 include/bootcfg.nsh | 16 +---
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 15 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/bootcfg.nsh b/include/bootcfg.nsh
index 59ca3f4..3b087e4 100644
--- a/include/bootcfg.nsh
+++ b/include/bootcfg.nsh
@@ -1868,7 +1868,6 @@ FunctionEnd
   Push $0
   Push $1
   Push $2
-  Push $3
 
   ; Initialize return value
   StrCpy $0 ""
@@ -1876,24 +1875,11 @@ FunctionEnd
   ${If} $2 != 0
 System::Call "rpcrt4::UuidCreate(p r2) i.r1"
 ${If} $1 == 0
-  ; Create reference pointer
-  System::Call "*(&t0) p.r3"
-  ${If} $3 != 0
-System::Call "rpcrt4::UuidToString(p r2, pr3r3) i.r1"
-${If} $1 == 0
-  ; Extract string from reference pointer
-  System::Call "*$3(p .r0)"
-  System::Call "*$0(&t${NSIS_MAX_STRLEN} .r0)"
-  StrCpy $0 "{$0}"
-  System::Call "rpcrt4::RpcStringFree(pr3)"
-${EndIf}
-System::Free $3
-  ${EndIf}
+  System::Call "*$2(g .r0)"
 ${EndIf}
 System::Free $2
   ${EndIf}
 
-  Pop $3
   Pop $2
   Pop $1
   Exch $0
-- 
2.20.1

Wrong sum for GTK installer initrd.gz inside netboot.tar.gz

[Holger Wansing]

Martin Michlmayr  wrote:
> * Cyril Brulebois  [2014-03-03 01:40]:
> > > There must be a small packaging bug somewhere…
> > 
> > The timestamp issue was indeed a nice clue. gzip has -n to avoid storing
> > such information, improving build reproducibility:
> > I shall note pigz needs has -n and -T:
> ...
> > Tagging with patch as the solution has been identified; I haven't
> > committed a proper patch yet though.
> 
> Sounds like this bug should be closed:

Done.


Holger


> commit c86563eeeb78b4d6b5841a012b21abac55aec56d
> Author: Cyril Brulebois 
> Date:   Thu Nov 26 01:57:36 2015 +0100
> 
> build/config/x86.cfg: Also pass -n to gzip.
> 
> commit d7a975094883477cc708f382e430a280fc8c7488
> Author: Cyril Brulebois 
> Date:   Thu Nov 26 01:46:33 2015 +0100
> 
> Rename GZIP into gzip, and pass an extra -T to pigz.
> 
> It needs both -n and -T to behave as gzip's -n.



-- 
Holger Wansing 
PGP-Finterprint: 496A C6E8 1442 4B34 8508  3529 59F1 87CA 156E B076

Bug#704162: marked as done (Wrong sum for GTK installer initrd.gz inside netboot.tar.gz)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Fri, 11 Jan 2019 23:01:42 +0100
with message-id <20190111230142.978c28021d129817d4392...@mailbox.org>
and subject line Wrong sum for GTK installer initrd.gz inside netboot.tar.gz
has caused the Debian Bug report #704162,
regarding Wrong sum for GTK installer initrd.gz inside netboot.tar.gz
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 this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
704162: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=704162
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: mirrors

Hi,

I don't really know where to file that; please reassign if I'm wrong.

I recently downloaded the debian-installer netboot archive at
http://debian.univ-nantes.fr/debian/dists/wheezy/main/installer-amd64/current/images/netboot/gtk/netboot.tar.gz
which is the GTK version of the netboot installer (this bug doesn't
affect the text version).

I noticed, after unpacking it and checking for the sums, hoping that
they will be the same as if I downloaded all the files individually,
that they all validate except one: the initrd.gz for this installer. (I
checked the sum of the .tar.gz itself, and it's OK).

The sums are, e.g., here:
http://debian.univ-nantes.fr/debian/dists/wheezy/main/installer-amd64/current/images/SHA256SUMS

When getting directly the initrd.gz from
http://debian.univ-nantes.fr/debian/dists/wheezy/main/installer-amd64/current/images/netboot/gtk/debian-installer/amd64/initrd.gz
I correctly get
f8971317915ed2ce8358b24ca88ea95c75ebe97a1e0a95f60c7977da368b3352
But when extracting it from the archive, I get
c2103b9533baa88814e770b493e5ba93f3043f3d73ce6e018addcd7c84b22cd4

By looking closer, the uncompressed initrd from both files is the same.
Only the date (from the gzip header) differs by a couple of seconds. And
this only happens for the GTK installer, not the text one, once again…

Furthermore, I also realized that Ubuntu is affected, too (!); the sum
for the GTK installer of Precise Pangolin has the same problem.

There must be a small packaging bug somewhere…

Regards,
-- 
Benjamin Cama 
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---

Martin Michlmayr  wrote:
> * Cyril Brulebois  [2014-03-03 01:40]:
> > > There must be a small packaging bug somewhere…
> > 
> > The timestamp issue was indeed a nice clue. gzip has -n to avoid storing
> > such information, improving build reproducibility:
> > I shall note pigz needs has -n and -T:
> ...
> > Tagging with patch as the solution has been identified; I haven't
> > committed a proper patch yet though.
> 
> Sounds like this bug should be closed:

Done.


Holger


> commit c86563eeeb78b4d6b5841a012b21abac55aec56d
> Author: Cyril Brulebois 
> Date:   Thu Nov 26 01:57:36 2015 +0100
> 
> build/config/x86.cfg: Also pass -n to gzip.
> 
> commit d7a975094883477cc708f382e430a280fc8c7488
> Author: Cyril Brulebois 
> Date:   Thu Nov 26 01:46:33 2015 +0100
> 
> Rename GZIP into gzip, and pass an extra -T to pigz.
> 
> It needs both -n and -T to behave as gzip's -n.



-- 
Holger Wansing 
PGP-Finterprint: 496A C6E8 1442 4B34 8508  3529 59F1 87CA 156E B076--- End Message ---

Bug#919025: debian-installer: [armhf] Please add image for Sinovoip_Banana_Pi_M1+

[Frederic Daniel Luc Lehobey]

Package: debian-installer
Severity: wishlist
Tags: d-i

Dear Maintainer,

debian-installer already builds images for Banana Pro[1].

Could you please add images for Sinovoip Banana Pi M1+ ? It is a
variant of Banana Pro that differs in the sound connector[2].

Best regards,
Frédéric Lehobey

1. https://d-i.debian.org/daily-images/armhf/daily/u-boot/
2. http://linux-sunxi.org/Banana_Pro#Variants

[d-i partitioning] Help page needs improvement

[Holger Wansing]

Thomas Hood  wrote:
> I just installed sarge d-i rc3 and was mostly pleased with the experience.
> However, the help page for the partitioner was written in poor English.
> 
> I realize that I should submit a patch but that will require that I do
> some research first and I want to make a note of this before I forget.

I don't see what's wrong or poor English on the partitioning help page,
and there is no progress on this 14 years old bug, so closing it.


Holger

-- 
Holger Wansing 
PGP-Finterprint: 496A C6E8 1442 4B34 8508  3529 59F1 87CA 156E B076

[installation-guide] uses old release numbering scheme (7.1 is not 7.0)

[Holger Wansing]

Filipus Klutiero  wrote:
> In wheezy, the release numbering scheme was changed to match the post-sarge 
> practice of putting the major version number in the first version number. The 
> first point release of wheezy is therefore Debian 7.1, not Debian 7.0.1. 
> Consequently, while Debian 6.0 refers to all squeeze versions, Debian 7.0 
> does not refer to all wheezy versions. The installation guide needs an update 
> to reflect that. http://www.debian.org/releases/stable/amd64/index.html.en 
> currently contains:
> > This document contains installation instructions for the Debian GNU/Linux 
> 7.0 system (codename “wheezy”), for the 64-bit PC (“amd64”) architecture. 

This has been changed in the meantime, we have now only the major number,
as in 
"This document contains installation instructions for the Debian GNU/Linux 9 
system (codename “stretch”), ... "


So closing this bug

Holger



-- 
Holger Wansing 
PGP-Finterprint: 496A C6E8 1442 4B34 8508  3529 59F1 87CA 156E B076

Bug#720133: marked as done ([installation-guide] uses old release numbering scheme (7.1 is not 7.0))

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Fri, 11 Jan 2019 23:50:32 +0100
with message-id <20190111235032.873587384f43050d1d1ef...@mailbox.org>
and subject line [installation-guide] uses old release numbering scheme (7.1 is 
not 7.0)
has caused the Debian Bug report #720133,
regarding [installation-guide] uses old release numbering scheme (7.1 is not 
7.0)
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 this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
720133: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=720133
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---

Package: installation-guide
Version: 20130503
Severity: minor

In wheezy, the release numbering scheme was changed to match the post-sarge 
practice of putting the major version number in the first version number. The 
first point release of wheezy is therefore Debian 7.1, not Debian 7.0.1. 
Consequently, while Debian 6.0 refers to all squeeze versions, Debian 7.0 does 
not refer to all wheezy versions. The installation guide needs an update to 
reflect that. http://www.debian.org/releases/stable/amd64/index.html.en 
currently contains:

This document contains installation instructions for the Debian GNU/Linux 7.0 
system (codename “wheezy”), for the 64-bit PC (“amd64”) architecture. It also 
contains pointers to more information and information on how to make the most 
of your new Debian system.


Besides the Abstract, the first section and section 1.6 are affected. I spotted 
these with a very quick scan, but I'm afraid there will be more.

By the way, http://www.debian.org/releases/wheezy/releasenotes has the same 
issue.

--
Filipus Klutiero
http://www.philippecloutier.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---

Filipus Klutiero  wrote:
> In wheezy, the release numbering scheme was changed to match the post-sarge 
> practice of putting the major version number in the first version number. The 
> first point release of wheezy is therefore Debian 7.1, not Debian 7.0.1. 
> Consequently, while Debian 6.0 refers to all squeeze versions, Debian 7.0 
> does not refer to all wheezy versions. The installation guide needs an update 
> to reflect that. http://www.debian.org/releases/stable/amd64/index.html.en 
> currently contains:
> > This document contains installation instructions for the Debian GNU/Linux 
> 7.0 system (codename “wheezy”), for the 64-bit PC (“amd64”) architecture. 

This has been changed in the meantime, we have now only the major number,
as in 
"This document contains installation instructions for the Debian GNU/Linux 9 
system (codename “stretch”), ... "


So closing this bug

Holger



-- 
Holger Wansing 
PGP-Finterprint: 496A C6E8 1442 4B34 8508  3529 59F1 87CA 156E B076--- End Message ---

Bug#891316: [MIA] Updating the cdebconf Uploaders list

[Holger Wansing]

Control: tags -1 + pending


Tobias Frost  (mia-teammaint) wrote:
> Source: cdebconf
> Version: 0.192 0.227 0.232 0.235 0.236 0.241
> Severity: minor
> User: m...@qa.debian.org
> Usertags: mia-teammaint
> 
> Regis Boudin  has not been working on
> the cdebconf package for quite some time.
> 
> We are tracking their status in the MIA team and would like to ask you
> to remove them from the Uploaders list of the package so we can close
> that part of the file.

Changed in GIT.

Tagging this bug as pending.



-- 
Holger Wansing 
PGP-Finterprint: 496A C6E8 1442 4B34 8508  3529 59F1 87CA 156E B076

Processed: [MIA] Updating the cdebconf Uploaders list

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing control commands:

> tags -1 + pending
Bug #891316 [src:cdebconf] Updating the cdebconf Uploaders list
Added tag(s) pending.

-- 
891316: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=891316
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Bug#301278: marked as done (Help page needs improvement)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Fri, 11 Jan 2019 23:32:20 +0100
with message-id <20190111233220.78b6fb516edb54bc0ffea...@mailbox.org>
and subject line [d-i partitioning] Help page needs improvement
has caused the Debian Bug report #301278,
regarding Help page needs improvement
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 this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
301278: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=301278
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: partconf
Version: d-i rc3
Severity: minor

I just installed sarge d-i rc3 and was mostly pleased with the experience.
However, the help page for the partitioner was written in poor English.

I realize that I should submit a patch but that will require that I do
some research first and I want to make a note of this before I forget.


-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (500, 'testing'), (50, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.10
Locale: LANG=en_IE@euro, LC_CTYPE=en_IE@euro (charmap=ISO-8859-15)

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---

Thomas Hood  wrote:
> I just installed sarge d-i rc3 and was mostly pleased with the experience.
> However, the help page for the partitioner was written in poor English.
> 
> I realize that I should submit a patch but that will require that I do
> some research first and I want to make a note of this before I forget.

I don't see what's wrong or poor English on the partitioning help page,
and there is no progress on this 14 years old bug, so closing it.


Holger

-- 
Holger Wansing 
PGP-Finterprint: 496A C6E8 1442 4B34 8508  3529 59F1 87CA 156E B076--- End Message ---

Re: Installer - add BIOS boot partition?

[Richard Hector]

On 12/01/19 3:44 AM, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 02:31:22PM +1300, Richard Hector wrote:
>> That worked great, thanks. Though it seems the '1.0MB' free before my
>> first partition wasn't big enough (or not aligned right?) so I had to
>> start from scratch.
>>
>> Incidentally, could/should I have made that RAID1? I created bios
>> partitions on both my disks, and have grub-install-ed to both. The
>> partitions do seem to be identical.
> 
> It might be possible to make it raid 1, although if you tell grub
> to install to both of them, that should work fine, and in fact you
> probably need that anyhow to get the bootstrap code into the MBR sector
> on both disks.  I think you are fine the way it is.  That partition is
> essentially an extension of the MBR sector for grub code so being per
> disk makes sense.

Ok - as long as I remember to install to both. There's no option to
install to both in one invocation, is there? Or a config file that
records which drives are/might be used for booting?

> And yes the partition tool won't let you create partitions that don't
> start on a 1MB alignment, so even though there was enough room for a
> partition there (of almost 1MB) it won't let you.  Not that loosing 1MB
> is a big deal.

1MB out of my 4TB disk? Come on, this is my money we're talking about :-)

>  Having to start over probably wasn't that big a deal
> either in this case.

True. I'd already missed the deadline for one backup run, and didn't
miss the next (this is the kvm host that my backup server runs on).

Thanks for all your help.

Cheers,
Richard

installation-guide: chapter 2.1.4 missing laptop resource

[Holger Wansing]

Werner Heuser  wrote:
> the document includes a link to Linux-on-Laptops. Please include a
> link to the TuxMobil - Linux Laptop and Notebook Installation Guides Survey
> http://tuxmobil.org/mylaptops.html too.

This URL dead nowadays, so this bug can be closed.


Holger

-- 
Holger Wansing 
PGP-Finterprint: 496A C6E8 1442 4B34 8508  3529 59F1 87CA 156E B076

Bug#440166: marked as done (installation-guide: chapter 2.1.4 missing laptop resource)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Sat, 12 Jan 2019 08:53:54 +0100
with message-id <20190112085354.c0c8ac1d7dacac15d5c3a...@mailbox.org>
and subject line installation-guide: chapter 2.1.4 missing laptop resource
has caused the Debian Bug report #440166,
regarding installation-guide: chapter 2.1.4 missing laptop resource
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 this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
440166: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=440166
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: installation-guide-i386
Version: 20070319
Severity: wishlist


Hello,

the document includes a link to Linux-on-Laptops. Please include a
link to the TuxMobil - Linux Laptop and Notebook Installation Guides Survey
http://tuxmobil.org/mylaptops.html too.

Werner

-- System Information:
Debian Release: lenny/sid
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (500, 'testing')
Architecture: i386 (i686)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-4-686 (SMP w/1 CPU core)
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1968)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash

-- no debconf information

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---

Werner Heuser  wrote:
> the document includes a link to Linux-on-Laptops. Please include a
> link to the TuxMobil - Linux Laptop and Notebook Installation Guides Survey
> http://tuxmobil.org/mylaptops.html too.

This URL dead nowadays, so this bug can be closed.


Holger

-- 
Holger Wansing 
PGP-Finterprint: 496A C6E8 1442 4B34 8508  3529 59F1 87CA 156E B076--- End Message ---