Re: 2.2rev3 CDs (and status of cdimage.d.o)
On Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 11:15:03AM +1000, jason andrade wrote: > have debian addressed the alleged file corruption (ext2) issue that > i heard was present in 2.4.X uptil 2.4.3 ? Well, given that that seems to be what's been causing cdimage.debian.org grief recently (I stupidly upgraded to 2.4.3 to see if it would cure a DMA interrupt error I've been getting on the HPT366 controller) I'd say the answer to that question was probably "no". BTW open.hands.com (a.k.a. cdimage.d.o, www.uk.d.o etc.) died rather more effectively than expected, and is no longer getting past the LILO "Loading Linux" bit. I should be able to sort this out before the end of today (GMT), at which point I'll move /dev/hdc to /dev/hdg, which should apparently side-step the issues with the VIA/Athlon combo. Cheers, Phil. -- Say no to software patents! http://petition.eurolinux.org/ Alcove UK --- Liberating Software --- http://www.alcove.com/ Philip Hands. +44 (0)118 9545656 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.hands.com/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.uk.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mirrors, it is nice, but after a week no one is up to date
Raph, "si j'aurais su j'aurais pas venu" :-)... Il y a donc un script qui indique tout l'arbre a prendre, et qui genere une image ISO bootable... Super...Je vais exploiter cette methode plutot que d'attendre la dispo chez les miroirs. Je serais de toute facons accrediter a fournir la debian, vu que c'est pour ma boite seulement, et que je gere le departement securite, je dois donc etre un peu trustable :-) Merci @+/L At 11:00 22/04/2001 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: >Le Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 09:24:50AM +0200, Laurent LEVIER écrivait: >> Ok, so for guys waiting for ISO images, it would be great to have a >> simple script to create them. > >How what a good idea !! It's called debian-cd. :) However when you build >the CDs yourself you're not providing official debian CDs. > >BTW, Phil Hands has had some (hardware/kernel driver) troubles on the >computer on which he should have generated the images, that explains why >they are not yet available. > >> This way, at the moment when the distribution is made, it is 5 minutes >> to create the new ISO image... > >The script take more time than 5 minutes to run. > >Cheers, >-- >Raphaël Hertzog -+- http://strasbourg.linuxfr.org/~raphael/ >Le bouche à oreille du Net : http://www.beetell.com >Naviguez sans se fatiguer à chercher : http://www.deenoo.com >Formation Linux et logiciel libre : http://www.logidee.com Laurent LEVIER IT Systems & Networks Security Specialist Security Enabling Process Security Incidents Response Team Manager SITA / EQUANT SC Tel. CVN : 7223-1912, ext. (+33) 4 92 38 19 12 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mirrors, it is nice, but after a week no one is up to date
So sprach Laurent LEVIER am Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 11:45:24AM +0200: > Raph, > > "si j'aurais su j'aurais pas venu" :-)... > > Il y a donc un script qui indique tout l'arbre a prendre, et qui genere une image >ISO bootable... > > Super...Je vais exploiter cette methode plutot que d'attendre la dispo chez les >miroirs. > Je serais de toute facons accrediter a fournir la debian, vu que c'est pour ma boite >seulement, et que je gere le departement securite, je dois donc etre un peu trustable >:-) Could you please say that again in German/English? Alexander Skwar -- How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (german) http://quote.6x.to (english) Homepage: http://www.digitalprojects.com | http://www.iso-top.de iso-top.de - Die günstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen Uptime: 1 day 13 hours 28 minutes -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mirrors, it is nice, but after a week no one is up to date
On Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 11:00:33AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Le Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 09:24:50AM +0200, Laurent LEVIER écrivait: > > Ok, so for guys waiting for ISO images, it would be great to have a > > simple script to create them. > > How what a good idea !! It's called debian-cd. :) However when you build > the CDs yourself you're not providing official debian CDs. > > BTW, Phil Hands has had some (hardware/kernel driver) troubles on the > computer on which he should have generated the images, that explains why > they are not yet available. > > > This way, at the moment when the distribution is made, it is 5 minutes > > to create the new ISO image... > > The script take more time than 5 minutes to run. For all architectures, on a reasonably quick machine, probably a minimum of 6 hours (that would need a quicker machine than I've got ;-), and that's assuming that the archive is in a clean state, which it currently is not. While it's true that open.hands.com has been crashing a lot recently, that is not the main reason I've not built images. I've actually succeeded in doing 2 & 2 halfs of CD production runs, between crashes, but the fact that the non-US/Contents file was broken, and that the package pool links for a few packages were wrong, means that the images were not 100% right, and while it might be OK to release the main archive with minor flaws, I'm of the oppinion that we should not release the CDs until all known fixable bugs are fixed, because downloading a load of CD images takes a long time, and if you then find that you're missing the one thing you were really intreested in, you're not going to be happy. When it comes to people that want to press CDs in quantity (which is the whole motivation behind the "official" CD images, after all) the reasons not to release are magnified yet further. If CD production were a trivial 5 minute thing, then I wouldn't bother with making official images. The fact is that it isn't, which is why it's worth doing them, and as long as I'm doing them you're going to have to put up with my anal "100% right, or not at all" attitude. If that's not to your liking, go ahead, get a copy of debian-cd and make your own --- it's not hard really. It takes a certain amount of attention to detail, and several hours, but it's not difficult. Cheers, Phil. -- Say no to software patents! http://petition.eurolinux.org/ Alcove UK --- Liberating Software --- http://www.alcove.com/ Philip Hands. +44 (0)118 9545656 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.hands.com/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.uk.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 2.2rev3 CDs (was Re: Stable Release plan)
Previously Nate Duehr wrote: > On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 09:37:33PM +0200, Bernd Hentig wrote: > > AFAIK, the only kernels worth having in either binary or source > > are (in release order) 2.0.36, 2.0.17, 2.0.19, 2.4.2. > > You don't like *any* of the 2.2 series? Considering he said `in release order' I assume he means 2.0.36, 2.2.17, 2.2.19 and 2.4.2. Personally the only ones I would use are 2.0.39, 2.2.19 and 2.4.XacY with X and Y and high as possible. Wichert. -- / Generally uninteresting signature - ignore at your convenience \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mirrors, it is nice, but after a week no one is up to date
Le Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 09:24:50AM +0200, Laurent LEVIER écrivait: > Ok, so for guys waiting for ISO images, it would be great to have a > simple script to create them. How what a good idea !! It's called debian-cd. :) However when you build the CDs yourself you're not providing official debian CDs. BTW, Phil Hands has had some (hardware/kernel driver) troubles on the computer on which he should have generated the images, that explains why they are not yet available. > This way, at the moment when the distribution is made, it is 5 minutes > to create the new ISO image... The script take more time than 5 minutes to run. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog -+- http://strasbourg.linuxfr.org/~raphael/ Le bouche à oreille du Net : http://www.beetell.com Naviguez sans se fatiguer à chercher : http://www.deenoo.com Formation Linux et logiciel libre : http://www.logidee.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mirrors, it is nice, but after a week no one is up to date
So sprach Laurent LEVIER am Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 08:02:27PM +0200: > Gentlemen, > > You should really consider being more opened for Debian downloads... > > The 2.2rev3 is not available on ANY of the listed sites, whatever the format is. Uh? The ISO images aren't available, that's for sure. But the individual packages are. For example, ftp.debian.org has it -> ftp://ftp.debian.org/pub/mirrors/debian/dists/Debian2.2r3 When will the ISO images (or even just the .list files) be available? Alexander Skwar -- How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (german) http://quote.6x.to (english) Homepage: http://www.digitalprojects.com | http://www.iso-top.de iso-top.de - Die günstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen Uptime: 1 day 2 hours 28 minutes -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 2.2rev3 CDs (was Re: Stable Release plan)
On Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 11:15:03AM +1000, jason andrade wrote: > On Sat, 21 Apr 2001, Nate Duehr wrote: > > > On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 09:37:33PM +0200, Bernd Hentig wrote: > > > AFAIK, the only kernels worth having in either binary or source > > > are (in release order) 2.0.36, 2.0.17, 2.0.19, 2.4.2. All others are > > > You don't like *any* of the 2.2 series? > > it looks like a typo to me > > 2.0.36, 2.2.17, 2.2.19, 2.4.2 I noted that after I hit send... hmm. Heh. > > i am not sure why one would want 2.0.36 or 2.2.17 on cd1.. i would > have put them on cd3, but that's just my opinion. from what anne > originally said though, 10 kernels is certainly getting out of hand > (and disk space) in a release sense. I haven't looked lately, but I don't think many distros keep around too many older kernels on the installation media -- they just let people grab them from their ftp sites. Newbies don't know how to replace kernels on boot media if they have a machine that is reluctant to use a newer kernel, and hopefully the newer kernels actually perform BETTER -- but we all know that doesn't always happen... :-) > have debian addressed the alleged file corruption (ext2) issue that > i heard was present in 2.4.X uptil 2.4.3 ? On that question, I would have no idea. I would assume the kernel maintainers would have more info -- the debian-cd crew tries to stick to their created packages for CD's, definitely. All the best, -- Nate Duehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GPG Key fingerprint = DCAF 2B9D CC9B 96FA 7A6D AAF4 2D61 77C5 7ECE C1D2 Public Key available upon request, or at wwwkeys.pgp.net and others. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 2.2rev3 CDs (was Re: Stable Release plan)
On Sat, 21 Apr 2001, Nate Duehr wrote: > On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 09:37:33PM +0200, Bernd Hentig wrote: > > AFAIK, the only kernels worth having in either binary or source > > are (in release order) 2.0.36, 2.0.17, 2.0.19, 2.4.2. All others are > You don't like *any* of the 2.2 series? it looks like a typo to me 2.0.36, 2.2.17, 2.2.19, 2.4.2 i am not sure why one would want 2.0.36 or 2.2.17 on cd1.. i would have put them on cd3, but that's just my opinion. from what anne originally said though, 10 kernels is certainly getting out of hand (and disk space) in a release sense. have debian addressed the alleged file corruption (ext2) issue that i heard was present in 2.4.X uptil 2.4.3 ? regards, -jason -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 2.2rev3 CDs (and status of cdimage.d.o)
On Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 10:43:03AM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> BTW open.hands.com (a.k.a. cdimage.d.o, www.uk.d.o etc.) died rather
> more effectively than expected, and is no longer getting past the LILO
> "Loading Linux" bit. I should be able to sort this out before the
> end of today (GMT), at which point I'll move /dev/hdc to /dev/hdg,
> which should apparently side-step the issues with the VIA/Athlon combo.
It seems that that was a mis-diagnosis, and what what actually happening
was 2.4.3 not doing the right thing with serial consoles, combined with
me being a bit dim, and not realising that that was why there was no output
after the "Loading Linux". Doh!
Anyway, the good news is that open is now up and running, using a 2.2.19
kernel, it's not generating the { DriveStatusError BadCRC } messages
on hdc (that seem to be related to the problems it was having), and it's
now running ext3, so should not end up failing to fsck if it does crash
again.
I've run debsums and rsync -c mirrors, without finding any corruption, so
it looks like I'm ready to do a CD run.
The only things I'm doing to the archive prior to making CDs, is deleting
the bulkmail binaries, and adding a link for the mysql source. If there's
something I'm missing, please tell me about it.
Cheers, Phil.
--
Say no to software patents! http://petition.eurolinux.org/
Alcove UK --- Liberating Software --- http://www.alcove.com/
Philip Hands. +44 (0)118 9545656 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.hands.com/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.uk.debian.org/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mirrors, it is nice, but after a week no one is up to date
Ok, so for guys waiting for ISO images, it would be great to have a simple script to create them. I mean a script that provides the list of files/trees, and the (I guess) mkisofs command with appropriate parameters and associated files to build automagically the ISO image. This way, at the moment when the distribution is made, it is 5 minutes to create the new ISO image... Thanks Brgrds/Laurent At 00:53 22/04/2001 +0200, Alexander Skwar wrote: >So sprach Laurent LEVIER am Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 08:02:27PM +0200: >> Gentlemen, >> >> You should really consider being more opened for Debian downloads... >> >> The 2.2rev3 is not available on ANY of the listed sites, whatever the format is. > >Uh? The ISO images aren't available, that's for sure. But the individual >packages are. For example, ftp.debian.org has it -> >ftp://ftp.debian.org/pub/mirrors/debian/dists/Debian2.2r3 > >When will the ISO images (or even just the .list files) be available? > >Alexander Skwar >-- >How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (german) http://quote.6x.to (english) >Homepage: http://www.digitalprojects.com | http://www.iso-top.de > iso-top.de - Die günstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen >Uptime: 1 day 2 hours 28 minutes Laurent LEVIER IT Systems & Networks, Unix System Engineer Security Specialist Argosnet Security Server : http://www.Argosnet.com "Le Veilleur Technologique", "The Technology Watcher" -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 2.2rev3 CDs (was Re: Stable Release plan)
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 09:37:33PM +0200, Bernd Hentig wrote: > AFAIK, the only kernels worth having in either binary or source > are (in release order) 2.0.36, 2.0.17, 2.0.19, 2.4.2. All others are > either junk and pretty unstable or useless (at least IMHO). > So, I've never really seen any use in having ancient sources in > the *distribution* cds and I fear things will become worse with > woody (5 CDs binary installation ?). You don't like *any* of the 2.2 series? What have you found to be the problems with them? I run them on a number of production machines at work and at home (mostly 2.2.19 now, but some older). -- Nate Duehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GPG Key fingerprint = DCAF 2B9D CC9B 96FA 7A6D AAF4 2D61 77C5 7ECE C1D2 Public Key available upon request, or at wwwkeys.pgp.net and others. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
