Bug#935334: closed by Lyndon Brown (Re: Re: debootstrap: man page says that --include will add package to download and extract list, but an experiment shows opposite)

2021-09-05 Thread Askar Safin
control: reopen 935334 Hi, Lyndon Brown. It seems you don't understand what I mean, please, re-read bug report. First of all, note on terminology, specially on word "extracting". I will use output of "debootstrap" tool itself as source of terminology. Look here, this is output of debootstrap:

Bug#993668: CUPS is missing after a default GNOME Desktop Install

2021-09-05 Thread Holger Wansing
Hi, Brian Potkin wrote (Sun, 5 Sep 2021 11:14:43 +0100): > I have a recent bullseye installation that has only the base system. > Therefore, I can be confident that 'apt install task-x-desktop > will show all the packages to be installed. Only kde and cinnamon > install the cups package. > >

Processed: Re: Bug#935334 closed by Lyndon Brown (Re: Re: debootstrap: man page says that --include will add package to download and extract list, but an experiment shows opposite)

2021-09-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing control commands: > reopen 935334 Bug #935334 {Done: Lyndon Brown } [debootstrap] debootstrap: man page says that --include will add package to download and extract list, but an experiment shows opposite Bug reopened Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #935334 to the same

Bug#993417: Installation failure on i386 system / Debian 11

2021-09-05 Thread Craig Norborg
That appears to have done it, about halfway through installing right now. Will let you know if that changes. On Sun, Sep 5, 2021 at 7:21 AM Steve McIntyre wrote: > Hi again Craig! > > On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 06:51:40PM -0600, Craig Norborg wrote: > >I used software called "Rufus". screen cap

Re: Should /boot be ext2, instead of ext4?

2021-09-05 Thread J. William Campbell
On 9/5/2021 6:41 AM, Steve McIntyre wrote: On Sun, Sep 05, 2021 at 09:00:52AM +0900, Hideki Yamane wrote: On Sat, 4 Sep 2021 21:43:50 +0100 Steve McIntyre wrote: Ummm. In my experience quite a number of older armel/armhf devices booting using U-Boot may *not* be able to boot using ext4. I don

Processed: tagging 891857

2021-09-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tags 891857 + pending Bug #891857 [busybox] busybox: Special case for /32 subnets not working as expected Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 891857: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-

Processed: Bug#891806 marked as pending in busybox

2021-09-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing control commands: > tag -1 pending Bug #891806 [src:busybox] busybox: Please include stty in busybox-udeb Ignoring request to alter tags of bug #891806 to the same tags previously set -- 891806: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=891806 Debian Bug Tracking System Contac

Processed: tagging 755804

2021-09-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tags 755804 + pending Bug #755804 [os-prober] os-prober: Attached patch adds support for recognizing Exherbo Linux Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 755804: https://bugs.debian

Processed: tagging 891806

2021-09-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tags 891806 + pending Bug #891806 [src:busybox] busybox: Please include stty in busybox-udeb Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 891806: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.

Processed: Bug#985811 marked as pending in debootstrap

2021-09-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing control commands: > tag -1 pending Bug #985811 [debootstrap] deboostrap: Auto proxy discovery checks legacy option name, doesn't work with auto-apt-proxy Ignoring request to alter tags of bug #985811 to the same tags previously set -- 985811: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport

Processed: Bug#985811 marked as pending in debootstrap

2021-09-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing control commands: > tag -1 pending Bug #985811 [debootstrap] deboostrap: Auto proxy discovery checks legacy option name, doesn't work with auto-apt-proxy Ignoring request to alter tags of bug #985811 to the same tags previously set -- 985811: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport

Processed: Bug#985481 marked as pending in debootstrap

2021-09-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing control commands: > tag -1 pending Bug #985481 [debootstrap] debootstrap: Detection of docker container is broken with cgroup v2 Ignoring request to alter tags of bug #985481 to the same tags previously set -- 985481: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=985481 Debian Bu

Processed: Bug#985481 marked as pending in debootstrap

2021-09-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing control commands: > tag -1 pending Bug #985481 [debootstrap] debootstrap: Detection of docker container is broken with cgroup v2 Ignoring request to alter tags of bug #985481 to the same tags previously set -- 985481: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=985481 Debian Bu

Processed: tagging 985481

2021-09-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tags 985481 + pending Bug #985481 [debootstrap] debootstrap: Detection of docker container is broken with cgroup v2 Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 985481: https://bugs.debia

Processed: tagging 985811

2021-09-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tags 985811 + pending Bug #985811 [debootstrap] deboostrap: Auto proxy discovery checks legacy option name, doesn't work with auto-apt-proxy Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 9

Processed: Bug#968195 marked as pending in console-setup

2021-09-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing control commands: > tag -1 pending Bug #968195 [console-setup] keyboard-configuration: cannot set specific layout Français (Bépo, ergonomique, façon Dvorak, AFNOR) for tty console Bug #984427 [console-setup] console-setup: ckbcomp generates invalid linux keymaps Ignoring request to al

Processed: Bug#820838 marked as pending in os-prober

2021-09-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing control commands: > tag -1 pending Bug #820838 [os-prober] os-prober: 40grub2 does not handle multiple initrd paths Ignoring request to alter tags of bug #820838 to the same tags previously set -- 820838: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=820838 Debian Bug Tracking Sys

Processed: tagging 820838

2021-09-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tags 820838 + pending Bug #820838 [os-prober] os-prober: 40grub2 does not handle multiple initrd paths Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 820838: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/

Processed: tagging 968195

2021-09-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tags 968195 + pending Bug #968195 [console-setup] keyboard-configuration: cannot set specific layout Français (Bépo, ergonomique, façon Dvorak, AFNOR) for tty console Bug #984427 [console-setup] console-setup: ckbcomp generates invalid linux key

Re: Should /boot be ext2, instead of ext4?

2021-09-05 Thread Steve McIntyre
On Sun, Sep 05, 2021 at 09:00:52AM +0900, Hideki Yamane wrote: >On Sat, 4 Sep 2021 21:43:50 +0100 >Steve McIntyre wrote: >> Ummm. In my experience quite a number of older armel/armhf devices >> booting using U-Boot may *not* be able to boot using ext4. > > I don't have any knowledge about U-Boot a

Bug#993417: Installation failure on i386 system / Debian 11

2021-09-05 Thread Steve McIntyre
Hi again Craig! On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 06:51:40PM -0600, Craig Norborg wrote: >I used software called "Rufus".   screen cap below of the options.  Same exact >drive when I did it with Ubuntu. Hmmm, that surprises me - Rufus normally works very well with our images. Out of curiosity, could you pl

Processed: tagging 825138

2021-09-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tags 825138 + pending Bug #825138 [src:console-setup] console-setup: please make the build reproducible Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 825138: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bi

Processed: Bug#825138 marked as pending in console-setup

2021-09-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing control commands: > tag -1 pending Bug #825138 [src:console-setup] console-setup: please make the build reproducible Ignoring request to alter tags of bug #825138 to the same tags previously set -- 825138: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=825138 Debian Bug Tracking S

Bug#993668: CUPS is missing after a default GNOME Desktop Install

2021-09-05 Thread Brian Potkin
On Sat 04 Sep 2021 at 21:09:56 +0200, Holger Wansing wrote: > Hi, > > Nader Nooryani wrote (Sat, 4 Sep 2021 16:16:50 > +0200): > > As of Debian 11, Print Server is no longer included as an option in the > > Debian installer if you use the defaults: Debian desktop environment, GNOME > > and stan

Bug#993668: CUPS is missing after a default GNOME Desktop Install

2021-09-05 Thread Brian Potkin
On Sun 05 Sep 2021 at 01:48:06 +0200, Nader Nooryani wrote: > Sorry, I should have mentioned that I have the packages you mention as well > as ipp-usb. > Will Debian detect and add both driverless-enabled printers and ones that > require drivers? Yes - if the scheduler is present. Printing, wheth

Re: Should /boot be ext2, instead of ext4?

2021-09-05 Thread Pascal Hambourg
Hello all, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: On Aug 7, 2021, at 4:12 PM, Hideki Yamane wrote: I've found that d-i creates /boot as ext2 for guided partioning with LVM. I think ext4 is better but is there any reason to do so? (e.g. some architecture or bootloader cannot recognize ext4 for it)

Bug#987503: swap partition only 1 GB instead of at least 1 x RAM size

2021-09-05 Thread Pascal Hambourg
Hello all, On Sun, 25 Apr 2021 17:33:28 + Martin wrote: On 2021-04-24 21:40, Steve McIntyre wrote: There is no such thing as a "correct" formula, though. The old formula was similarly causing lots of hassle for people installing on servers who didn't want to waste hundreds of gigabytes on