Re: "tasksel arch any" vs. "keeping track of n-m in debian-cd"?
On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 10:47:33PM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
>Joey Hess (07/03/2013):
>
>> Re #697868, I would much rather leave it to the maintainers of
>> desktop environments (and/or Tech Ctte :P) to ensure that they have
>> eg, necessary network-manager dependencies on appropriate
>> architectures, rather than making tasksel need to track
>> that. Reading that bug, the only reason task-gnome is depending on
>> network-manager is to ensure it gets on CD#1. There are other ways
>> to do that, particularly debian-cd's generate_di+k_list is
>> appropriate since netcfg arranges for network-manager to be
>> installed.
>
>I know you're joking but that maintainers vs. tech-ctte was insane
>already, so I'd rather adjust d-i (through tasksel) to make sure we
>have decent networking support in the installed system.
>
>Delegating such things to debian-cd seems like the wrong way to fix
>it, but let's see what Steve thinks of it (personally, I'd hate to
>have to keep track of such things in debian-cd).
What I did for RC1 in debian-cd was to add network-manager and
network-manager-gnome to tasks/wheezy/Debian-{gnome,generic} *before*
task-essential-gnome. That made sure that those two packages made it
onto CD#1 regardless of other dependencies.
I'm OK with doing that kind of thing in future (or for other people to
do it too - just ask for commit access to the debian-cd repo), *but*
only (a) where it's strictly necessary and (b) in limited
circumstances for corner-cases like this. It's very much overkill
territory to do this often, and will be prone to breakage.
--
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com
Armed with "Valor": "Centurion" represents quality of Discipline,
Honor, Integrity and Loyalty. Now you don't have to be a Caesar to
concord the digital world while feeling safe and proud.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-cd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130409105015.gd31...@einval.com
Re: "tasksel arch any" vs. "keeping track of n-m in debian-cd"?
Thanks Steve.
Steve McIntyre (09/04/2013):
> What I did for RC1 in debian-cd was to add network-manager and
> network-manager-gnome to tasks/wheezy/Debian-{gnome,generic} *before*
> task-essential-gnome. That made sure that those two packages made it
> onto CD#1 regardless of other dependencies.
>
> I'm OK with doing that kind of thing in future (or for other people to
> do it too - just ask for commit access to the debian-cd repo), *but*
> only (a) where it's strictly necessary and (b) in limited
> circumstances for corner-cases like this. It's very much overkill
> territory to do this often, and will be prone to breakage.
Then I think I'd rather ask you to keep doing so for wheezy's
lifetime, than trying to fiddle with tasksel at this very late point
of the freeze.
Mraw,
KiBi.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Gnome installability vs. GNU/kFreeBSD (was: "tasksel arch any" vs. "keeping track of n-m in debian-cd"?)
Cyril Brulebois (09/04/2013): > Then I think I'd rather ask you to keep doing so for wheezy's > lifetime, than trying to fiddle with tasksel at this very late point > of the freeze. To clarify as I did on IRC: 1. I thought both the addition of iw and network-manager-gnome as Depends or Recommends in tasksel was depending on that "arch: all" vs. "arch: any" discussion. 2. However, the current tasksel package in wheezy and sid already implements the Depends: on network-manager-gnome, for all archs. Since we just agreed with Steve to keep the NM-related dependencies on the debian-cd side (iw was already taken care of in src:netcfg), we could think of uploading tasksel with just that network-manager-gnome dependency dropped, which would fix installability issues on kfreebsd-*. I'm not exactly sure how well Gnome is supported on GNU/kFreeBSD anyway, so that might not be a huge practical issue. But if -bsd@ people want that fixed, they can still chime in *right now*, so that we can patch tasksel while src:debian-installer is getting built, before we prepare d-i wheezy rc2 images. Mraw, KiBi. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Gnome installability vs. GNU/kFreeBSD
Hi, On 09/04/13 13:45, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > 1. I thought both the addition of iw and network-manager-gnome as > Depends or Recommends in tasksel was depending on that "arch: all" > vs. "arch: any" discussion. As long as they are lowered to Recommends, it shouldn't matter any more if they are uninstallable on a particular arch? A consequence of Depends was that they would have been prioritised for GNOME CD1. If we can't do it that way, we may be able to accomplish this using debian-cd's scripts such as tasks/wheezy/Debian-gnome or forcd1. As a bonus, I suspect packages in a task's Recommends get installed automatically, as long as they are present on the available install media? > I'm not exactly sure how well Gnome is supported on GNU/kFreeBSD > anyway, [...] During wheezy development, GNOME 3 was so broken for us that xfce was chosen as a default for new installs. Multiple show-stopper issues got fixed during the freeze though. At this point I believe it 'should work' but so few people have probably tried a full GNU/kFreeBSD Wheezy GNOME desktop yet, and neither have I... Regards, -- Steven Chamberlain ste...@pyro.eu.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-cd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/51644ff3.5060...@pyro.eu.org
Re: Gnome installability vs. GNU/kFreeBSD
Le mardi, 9 avril 2013 19.29:23, Steven Chamberlain a écrit : > During wheezy development, GNOME 3 was so broken for us that xfce was > chosen as a default for new installs. Multiple show-stopper issues got > fixed during the freeze though. At this point I believe it 'should > work' but so few people have probably tried a full GNU/kFreeBSD Wheezy > GNOME desktop yet, and neither have I... I just did (in kvm/qemu) and the result isn't great (for Gnome): - lightdm + xfce "just works" for what I could test. - gdm3 … doesn't finish loading. It fullscreen-says "Oops, an error occured". - lightdm + "Gnome": same. - lightdm + "Gnome classic": same. I can provide logs and file bugs if it helps. OdyX -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-cd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201304092015.49092.o...@debian.org
Debian EFI test CDs, build 4 on i386-efi
Hello, Just to let you know the build of the EFI i386 CDs will not work on a Dell Latitude 10 Tablet. It just hangs after selecting either text or graphical installer from the grub menu. I've found multiple users of similar tablets unable to install linux due to the 32bit EFI hardware on these devices: Dell latitude 10 ST2 & ST2E Tablet Acer Iconia W510 Tablet There are currently no distros that work that I can find with 32bit EFI images. I've only been able to get grub to boot and the system just hangs when loading a kernel. They are Intel Atom x86 based Windows 8 tablets with 32bit EFI only no legacy bios options.
