Bug#988013: mini.iso fails to load grub.cfg (UEFI)
Package: debian-cd Severity: important Tags: d-i Hello, The mini.iso (graphical version) boots to a grub prompt. Loading grub.cfg with 'configfile (hd0)/boot/grub/grub.cfg' works and afterwards the image works correctly. I tried buster, bullseye rc1 and the daily image from 1.May. The bullseye rc1 firmware netinst boots fine, so I'm guessing it's not due to bugs in this particular UEFI implementation. In case it matters, the motherboard is ASRock B550M Steel Legend, firmware version 1.52, upgraded to 2.0. Kind regards, Andrei -- System Information: Debian Release: 10.9 APT prefers stable-updates APT policy: (500, 'stable-updates'), (500, 'proposed-updates'), (500, 'stable') Architecture: arm64 (aarch64) Kernel: Linux 3.18.0-12-ARCH (SMP w/4 CPU cores; PREEMPT) Kernel taint flags: TAINT_WARN Locale: LANG=ro_RO.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=ro_RO.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE=ro_RO.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /usr/bin/dash Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system) Versions of packages debian-cd depends on: ii apt1.8.2.3 ii bc 1.07.1-2+b1 ii bzip2 1.0.6-9.2~deb10u1 ii cpp4:8.3.0-1 ii curl 7.64.0-4+deb10u2 ii dpkg-dev 1.19.7 pn grep-dctrl pn libcompress-zlib-perl pn libdigest-md5-perl ii libdpkg-perl 1.19.7 pn lynx ii make 4.2.1-1.2 ii perl [libdigest-sha-perl] 5.28.1-6+deb10u1 pn tofrodos ii wget 1.20.1-1.1 pn xorriso | genisoimage Versions of packages debian-cd recommends: ii dosfstools 4.1-2 pn hfsutils pn isolinux pn mtools ii netpbm 2:10.0-15.3+b2 pn syslinux-common pn syslinux-utils debian-cd suggests no packages.
Some suggestions for changes to w.d.o/CD/faq entries
Hi, I'm updating the Romanian translation for the CD/faq and I have a few comments/suggestions to the English version: http://www.debian.org/CD/faq/index.en.html#netinst [...] which has a cheap Internet connection [...] May I suggest s/a cheap/an adequate/ here since the cost of the internet connection is not too relative. Probably, some information about the data to be downloaded would be more helpful instead, like: "A typical graphical installation without additional packages should download about ..." http://www.debian.org/CD/faq/index.en.html#outdated [...]stable releases only happen about every 1.5 years... I thought stable releases happen about every 2 years. Also, there is no mention of backports in this section. Suggestion: "If you only need newer version of specific packages, you can also try the backports service, which takes packages from testing and modifies them to work on stable. This option is mostly safer than installing the same package directly from testing." http://www.debian.org/CD/faq/index.en.html#record-unix [..] Add option stream_recording=on to get on BD-RE full nominal speed without checkreading. I think it needs some rewording to: "In order to get full nominal speed (but without ...[1]) on BD-RE add option stream_recording=on." [1] I have no idea what checkreading is supposed to mean and vim spell checking is complaining about it. http://www.debian.org/CD/faq/index.en.html#old Note that when you install using an old CD/DVD, the contents of /etc/apt/sources.list will reference the current stable Debian release by default. This means that any upgrade over the net will upgrade to the current stable release. To avoid this, but still receive security upgrades for an old release which is still supported, you may want to change the contents of this file, replacing "stable" with "oldstable". Is this still valid? As far as I know sources.list is now by codename (or was that introduced only for squeeze?). (Please CC me on replies, I'm not subscribed to -cd) Kind regards, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Some suggestions for changes to w.d.o/CD/faq entries
[Not CC-ing you since I assume you are subscribed] On Du, 08 ian 12, 10:28:15, George Danchev wrote: > > Thomas' answer to your question, as I don't see you in CC: > http://lists.debian.org/debian-cd/2012/01/msg5.html Actually I did get it (Bcc?), but thanks :) > I don't mind the wording as you suggest it (JFTR: it was cooked up by > me and Thomas). Well, the whole idea is to read back the appropriate > amount of bytes from the burnt media (this is the tricky part), well > and piping these to a checksummer (the trivial part). > > There is a separate patch waiting for review and approval at: > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-cd/2011/12/msg00032.html > > which explanins the problem and how to deal with it. This is reading back by: > a) isosize and dd > b) check_debian_iso script Thomas has developed. Actually I saw that patch on -www, but completely forgot about it. At a quick glance it seems quite comprehensive, but I wonder if it is adequate for the FAQ, or if it would be better to have a separate page for it. Besides, it doesn't address the "checkreading" which doesn't seem to be an English word. Even if it is the technically correct term for what is going on I doubt FAQ readers actually care and would suggest to avoid it (also for the sake of translators). You might also want to CC -l10n-english on such patches ;) Any opinions about my other suggestions? Thanks for reading, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Some suggestions for changes to w.d.o/CD/faq entries
On Mi, 11 ian 12, 00:24:10, Steve McIntyre wrote: > On Sat, Jan 07, 2012 at 03:26:32PM +0200, Andrei Popescu wrote: > >Hi, > > > >I'm updating the Romanian translation for the CD/faq and I have a few > >comments/suggestions to the English version: > > > >http://www.debian.org/CD/faq/index.en.html#netinst > >[...] which has a cheap Internet connection [...] > > > >May I suggest s/a cheap/an adequate/ here since the cost of the internet > >connection is not too relative. Probably, some information about the > >data to be downloaded would be more helpful instead, like: > > I'd just do s/cheap/fast/ here, to be honest. My reason for not suggesting that is because: - "fast" is relative too around the globe - the user might have no better alternative and would be prepared to go for it anyway, even over dial-up or GPRS or whatever. > >"A typical graphical installation without additional packages should > >download about ..." > > I'm not sure of a reasonable estimate to put there. Any suggestions, > anyone? Yes, pointing to another source that is constantly updated :) For estimates of data to be downloaded see the http://www.debian.org/releases/stable/amd64/apds02.html.en>Installation Guide. However, from reading that page it is not very clear to me if download size for the respective tasks includes "Standard" (I think it does) and "Standard" is missing from that table (only install size is mentioned in the beginning of the section), but it's good anyway. Kind regards, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: CD image doesn't exist for download?
On Mi, 11 iul 12, 17:58:32, Gary Dale wrote: > On 11/07/12 05:43 PM, Andrei POPESCU wrote: > > > >http://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/6.0.5/multi-arch/iso-cd/debian-6.0.5-amd64-i386-netinst.iso > >(this image is accessible directly from the Debian home page) Ok, I admit, I'm also subscribed to -www where it's introduction was discussed. > Interesting. How did you find it? It's not on the network install > page. It's on the regular CD page, but maybe it should be also linked from the netinstall page (debian-cd in BCC, in case Steve is not following this thread)? Hope this explains, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic signature.asc Description: Digital signature
