Cyril Brulebois:
Control: tag -1 pending
Niels Thykier (2025-01-04):
The switch has already been flipped (dpkg/1.22.13).
I knew I should have skipped that part, as quickly skimming for “root”
didn't turn up a hit on R³ obviously… :) (Hindsight, always 20/20.)
Note it can in theory
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 pending
Bug #1091668 [debian-installer] debian-installer: Explicitly declare
requirement for root
Added tag(s) pending.
--
1091668: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1091668
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org w
Control: tag -1 pending
Niels Thykier (2025-01-04):
> The switch has already been flipped (dpkg/1.22.13).
I knew I should have skipped that part, as quickly skimming for “root”
didn't turn up a hit on R³ obviously… :) (Hindsight, always 20/20.)
> Note it can in theory also
Cyril Brulebois:
Hej Niels,
Niels Thykier (2025-01-04):
The transition has moved to the endgame and this bug is now RC. This bug is
filed on the assumption that the remark in d/rules about a part of the code
needing root is true. The provided patch (MR) explicitly has
debian-installer opt-in
Hej Niels,
Niels Thykier (2025-01-04):
> The transition has moved to the endgame and this bug is now RC. This bug is
> filed on the assumption that the remark in d/rules about a part of the code
> needing root is true. The provided patch (MR) explicitly has
> debian-installer o
. The patch is at
https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/debian-installer/-/merge_requests/57
Best regards,
Niels
Hi
The transition has moved to the endgame and this bug is now RC. This bug
is filed on the assumption that the remark in d/rules about a part of
the code needing root is true
Package: debian-installer
Severity: important
Tags: patch
X-Debbugs-Cc: ni...@thykier.net
User: ni...@thykier.net
Usertags: rrr-no-as-default-issue
Hi,
Filing this one to ensure it is on my bug radar for the MBF and for
tracking status. The patch is at
https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/d
ezone setup: [O]
User/password setup: [O]
Install tasks: [O]
Install boot loader: [O]
Overall install: [O]
Comments/Problems:
Manually creating an (ecrypted) btrfs partition as the root partition
(two volumes automatically created, @ and @home) results in the @ volume
being mo
Your message dated Sat, 4 May 2024 15:16:05 +0200
with message-id <20240504151605.fac9949d94d21c59de696...@mailbox.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#1043226: debian-installer: Please consider moving root
user setup to expert install, or change text
has caused the Debian Bug report #1043226,
reg
With latest user-setup upload 1.97, this has been dealed with, so closing.
--
Holger Wansing
PGP-Fingerprint: 496A C6E8 1442 4B34 8508 3529 59F1 87CA 156E B076
Package: console-setup
Version: 1.226
Severity: important
Dear Maintainer,
Since the upgrade to 1.226, I can't open my LUKS root FS beause of broken
initramfs.
I can still boot under 6.6.11 since its initramfs is not updated with latest
tools.
I compared both initramfs and found diff
Processing control commands:
> forwarded -1
> https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/user-setup/-/merge_requests/6
Bug #952450 [user-setup] user-setup: set SYSTEMD_SULOGIN_FORCE=1 in env for
rescue/emergency.service when root account is locked
Set Bug forwarded-to-address to
Package: user-setup
Followup-For: Bug #952450
Control: forwarded -1
https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/user-setup/-/merge_requests/6
Your message dated Tue, 19 Sep 2023 23:54:42 +0200
with message-id <00d7049e-0a8f-432c-ae07-eaee9d152...@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Debian Installer RC1 on MIPS
has caused the Debian Bug report #264435,
regarding should check root filesystem type and warn
to be marked as done.
This
On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 10:03:22PM +0100, Samuel Henrique wrote:
> > So, many users, and especially newcomers to Debian, follow the instructions
> > in the
> > first line and are then surprised when they can't use sudo from their user
> > from
> > their newly installed system.
> I've seen this is
On 19/08/2023 18:42, Pascal Hambourg wrote:
On 19/08/2023 at 10:28, Diederik de Haas wrote:
On Monday, 7 August 2023 18:25:07 CEST Jonathan Carter wrote:
Firstly, the instructions start off with "You need to set a password for
'root'", followed by seemingly uninteresti
On 19/08/2023 at 10:28, Diederik de Haas wrote:
On Monday, 7 August 2023 18:25:07 CEST Jonathan Carter wrote:
Firstly, the instructions start off with "You need to set a password for
'root'", followed by seemingly uninteresting text about what a good password
shoul
On Monday, 7 August 2023 18:25:07 CEST Jonathan Carter wrote:
> Source: debian-installer
> Version: 20230607+deb12u1
>
> Firstly, the instructions start off with "You need to set a password for
> 'root'", followed by seemingly uninteresting text about what a goo
> So, many users, and especially newcomers to Debian, follow the instructions
> in the
> first line and are then surprised when they can't use sudo from their user
> from
> their newly installed system.
I've seen this issue happening so many times.
This would be a huge UX improvement for the in
t; Dear Maintainer,
>
> When setting up users and passwords in debian-installer in a default install,
> it prompts a user to set up a root password. In d-i, this works very different
> than in other installers, which causes quite a bit of confusion for users.
>
> Firstly, the instructio
Source: debian-installer
Version: 20230607+deb12u1
Severity: wishlist
Dear Maintainer,
When setting up users and passwords in debian-installer in a default install,
it prompts a user to set up a root password. In d-i, this works very different
than in other installers, which causes quite a bit
sment.
My understanding from the relevant manual[1] is that 'emergency.target' is a
similar, albeit even more basic systemd state that is automatically selected
if early boot preconditions fail and/or when serious errors occur.
The system used for testing has a locked root user account, but is
On 02/03/2023 at 19:21, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
What happens if you don't set a root password and got dropped into
maintenance mode at boot-time?
Or if you cannot open a user session for whatever reason ?
You're stuck. Default settings allow to launch an unauthenticated root
she
Hi,
Jeremy Bícha (2023-03-02):
> Please see the attached screenshot. I believe Debian would be improved
> if this page was reworded.
>
> It begins with a strong emphatic statement "You need to set a password
> for 'root'
>
> If someone is not reading very
Is there any update to this? I can't find the source anywhere to test it
myself either.
On Wed 16 Feb 2022 at 10:32:25 +0100, More Thanks wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 04:52:48PM +0800, Glen Huang wrote:
> > On Feb 16, 2022, at 4:38 PM, Philip Hands wrote:
> > > Glen Huang writes:
> > > > Thanks to Cyril Brulebois’s tip that I could use DEBCONF_DEBUG
> > > > to debug debconf, I
On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 04:52:48PM +0800, Glen Huang wrote:
> On Feb 16, 2022, at 4:38 PM, Philip Hands wrote:
> > Glen Huang writes:
> > > Thanks to Cyril Brulebois’s tip that I could use DEBCONF_DEBUG
> > > to debug debconf, I found out the seen flag should be set in order
> > > for db_input to
Setting a placeholder value is a great idea, it simplifies the early_command
since the seen flag no longer needs to be set.
Thanks for the tip Philip.
> On Feb 16, 2022, at 4:38 PM, Philip Hands wrote:
>
> Glen Huang writes:
>
>> Thanks to Cyril Brulebois’s tip that I could use DEBCONF_DEBUG
Glen Huang writes:
> Thanks to Cyril Brulebois’s tip that I could use DEBCONF_DEBUG to debug
> debconf, I found out the seen flag should be set in order for db_input to
> pick up the value.
>
> Case solved, thanks to everyone helped!
I was wondering about that, but didn't see my code setting l
;
> I’m not sure if escaping is the issue. I tried directly specifying the
> password:
>
> debconf-set passwd/root-password passwd1234
> debconf-set passwd/root-password-again passwd1234
>
> Still got prompted.
>
> I tried to debug it with
>
> d-i preseed/earl
Thanks for the tip.
I’m not sure if escaping is the issue. I tried directly specifying the password:
debconf-set passwd/root-password passwd1234
debconf-set passwd/root-password-again passwd1234
Still got prompted.
I tried to debug it with
d-i preseed/early_command string \
set -x
On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 08:08:08PM +0800, Glen Huang wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I want to set the root password to a random string. this is the preseed I use:
>
> d-i preseed/early_command string \
> pw="$(tr -dc A-Za-z0-9 debconf-set passwd/root-password "$pw"
Hi,
I want to set the root password to a random string. this is the preseed I use:
d-i preseed/early_command string \
pw="$(tr -dc A-Za-z0-9 '
Directly setting the password also works:
d-i passwd/root-password password r00tme
d-i passwd/root-password-again password r00tme
&
Your message dated Sun, 02 Jan 2022 09:51:54 +0100
with message-id <2c19e32c-fcd0-46ef-8591-8e28d423c...@mailbox.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#1002921: installation-reports: No Screen Reader,
Cannot boot into MATE GUI, Root only can
has caused the Debian Bug report #1002921,
reg
On Sun, Jan 2, 2022, 00:39 john doe wrote:
> On 1/2/2022 1:20 AM, D.J.J. Ring, Jr. wrote:
> > I made a new partition for /home and I reinstalled Debian, this time I
> > could lot in to MATE and I could log into the CLI.
> >
> > But the issue remains of after the Installation disk detects my sound
On 1/2/2022 1:20 AM, D.J.J. Ring, Jr. wrote:
I made a new partition for /home and I reinstalled Debian, this time I
could lot in to MATE and I could log into the CLI.
But the issue remains of after the Installation disk detects my sound card,
it seems to find my sound card, but immediately after
sound during accessible
> installation, This time I made up a brand new never before user name.
>
> The result was the very same, I could not log in with my user account,
> only root.
>
> What is your next suggestion?
>
> There is an installer issue, not having speech during
r account, only
root.
What is your next suggestion?
There is an installer issue, not having speech during an accessible
installation is an installer issue .
Making a brand new user account and not being able to log in might be
something else. Where do I go to get this part fixed?
Thanks,
David
not log in. I
could log in as previously by using root.
At that time, I didn't know a way to disable lightdm login and just log in
with the console. I suspect I'd get the same result as I do now, that I
could not log in with any user account, only the supervisor account, root.
At that ti
could log in as previously by using root.
So reusing by /home/djringjr folder won't let me log in, using a brand-new
user account with brand new files from /etc/skel won't let me run the GUI.
Since then I've discovered with my current installation not only can't I
access the
successful installation. I did some
investigation into this.
This is what I did: . I disabled lightdm using systemctl disable lightdm
then more recently I used the root command "systemctl set-default
multi-user.target" and now I see I cannot even log in as my regular user.
I tried a new
Also I just used
systemctl set-default multi-user.target to change to a console log in.
I cannot log in as user, only as root.
GUI can also only be started as root.
Have espeakup in console by as soon as log into Mate using root account, no
sound, Orca setup has no speech settings.
Regards
el
lspci -knn: Kernel modules: snd_hda_intel
lspci -knn: 00:1c.0 PCI bridge [0604]: Intel Corporation Wildcat Point-LP PCI
Express Root Port #3 [8086:9c94] (rev e3)
lspci -knn: Kernel driver in use: pcieport
lspci -knn: 00:1c.3 PCI bridge [0604]: Intel Corporation Wildcat Point-LP PCI
Expres
Thank you for the discussion! I found it educational and motivating,
and hope that everyone found the same. It's really refreshing to see
this. Sorry for the naivety in my analysis and in the delay replying;
I've been drained/busy, but I read each of your emails carefully, wanted
to reply to eac
Le 09/12/2021 à 23:29, TomK a écrit :
If there is a /usr partition, /usr/share will be part of it. So,
separate /usr/share is exactly as common s/as separate /usr.
No, by "separate /usr/share" I (and Philip I guess, please correct me if
I am wrong) mean "separate from /usr".
/usr/share has
Le 09/12/2021 à 00:25, Steve McIntyre a écrit :
Nod. A separate /usr filesystem is a configuration that was supported
well by d-i and Debian for a number of years, hence I agreed that it
was worth improving rescue-mode to explicitly support it. I *could*
also be convinced that we should do simil
--
From: Pascal Hambourg
Sent: December 8, 2021 11:41:11 AM UTC
To: Philip Hands , 1000...@bugs.debian.org, TomK
Subject: Re: Bug#1000239: Rescue system won't find root partition, but insists
on /usr
Le 08/12/2021 à 10:49, Philip Hands a écrit :
>
> Is it a problem if /home or /us
On Wed, Dec 08, 2021 at 11:36:47PM +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
>Pascal Hambourg writes:
>
>> Le 08/12/2021 à 10:49, Philip Hands a écrit :
>>>
>>> Is it a problem if /home or /usr/share are left unmounted during rescue?
>>
>> /usr/share contains architecture-independent files for many programs
>>
Pascal Hambourg writes:
> Le 08/12/2021 à 10:49, Philip Hands a écrit :
>>
>> Is it a problem if /home or /usr/share are left unmounted during rescue?
>
> /usr/share contains architecture-independent files for many programs
> such as bash, grub, os-prober, debconf, dpkg, initramfs-tools...
>
>
Le 08/12/2021 à 10:49, Philip Hands a écrit :
Is it a problem if /home or /usr/share are left unmounted during rescue?
/usr/share contains architecture-independent files for many programs
such as bash, grub, os-prober, debconf, dpkg, initramfs-tools...
How common is it to have a separate /u
TomK writes:
> This sounds correct, based on my experience with the bug.
> I suppose now there are zero ways to definitively determine which
> partition is actually root. So maybe a hidden flag (empty) file in
> root might do the trick.
I'd expect that looking for e.g. /et
This sounds correct, based on my experience with the bug. I suppose now there
are zero ways to definitively determine which partition is actually root. So
maybe a hidden flag (empty) file in root might do the trick.
But the fact that /usr can be automounted, but nothing else can be manually
Steve McIntyre (2021-12-06):
> In fact, it needed more work than that - the code chrooted into
> /target and ran mount there. That didn't work for a separate /usr. But
> I've refactored the code and made things work more cleanly inside d-i.
>
> I'm pondering backporting the same fix for future bu
Your message dated Mon, 06 Dec 2021 01:03:24 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1000239: fixed in rescue 1.86
has caused the Debian Bug report #1000239,
regarding Rescue system won't find root partition, but insists on /usr
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the pr
On Sat, Dec 04, 2021 at 10:42:29PM +, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>On Sat, Dec 04, 2021 at 11:37:28PM +0100, Pascal Hambourg wrote:
>>Le 03/12/2021 à 22:08, Nicholas D Steeves a écrit :
>>>
>>>
>>> c) parse /target/etc/fstab, and attempt to mount other partitions
>>
>>The rescue system already
Le 03/12/2021 à 22:08, Nicholas D Steeves a écrit :
c) parse /target/etc/fstab, and attempt to mount other partitions
The rescue system already offers to do it for separate /boot and
/boot/efi, so why couldn't it do for separate /usr too ?
On Sat, Dec 04, 2021 at 11:37:28PM +0100, Pascal Hambourg wrote:
>Le 03/12/2021 à 22:08, Nicholas D Steeves a écrit :
>>
>>
>> c) parse /target/etc/fstab, and attempt to mount other partitions
>
>The rescue system already offers to do it for separate /boot and /boot/efi,
>so why couldn't it d
cue mode.
Having just tested it with a separate /usr, all one needs to do is
select the actual root partition as you'd expect, then when prompted to
execute a shell, select the second option (Execute a shell in the
installer environment), then the trick is to mount the /usr partition b
problem here, although it exacerbates what
> appears to be a pre-existing bug in the rescue mode[0]. The root cause is
> that since Debian 9 [1][2], the "/usr-like" parts of the root filesystem
> are no longer guaranteed to be self-contained: important shared
> libraries[3]
> a
cue mode[0]. The root cause is
that since Debian 9 [1][2], the "/usr-like" parts of the root filesystem
are no longer guaranteed to be self-contained: important shared libraries[3]
and executables have been gradually moving into /usr for a while, and
stretch was the point at which this
Am 03.12.2021 um 22:08 schrieb Nicholas D Steeves:
2. Reassign to src:rescue, and fix the rescue system.
Looks like a duplicate of
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=769738
ian-testing-amd64-netinst.iso
> 2. Selected sda2
> 3. Yes, mount /boot/efi
> 4. Execute a shell in /dev/sda2
> 5. No usable shell was found on your root file system (/dev/sda2)
> 6. Changed virtual terminal
> 7. cd /target && ls bin
>ls: bin: No such file or director
Processing control commands:
> severity -1 normal
Bug #1000239 [debian-installer] Rescue system won't find root partition, but
insists on /usr
Severity set to 'normal' from 'serious'
--
1000239: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1000239
Debian Bu
Control: severity -1 normal
On Fri, Dec 03, 2021 at 04:08:24PM -0500, Nicholas D Steeves wrote:
> Steps I used to try to reproduce:
>
> 1. Downloaded debian-testing-amd64-netinst.iso2021-12-03 16:21 408M
> 2. Installed to EFI-enabled qemu eg:
>kvm -bios /usr/share/ovmf/bios.bin -m 2G
/debian-separate-usr-sda.raw \
-cdrom /scratch/debian-testing-amd64-netinst.iso
2. Selected sda2
3. Yes, mount /boot/efi
4. Execute a shell in /dev/sda2
5. No usable shell was found on your root file system (/dev/sda2)
6. Changed virtual terminal
7. cd /target && ls bin
Processing control commands:
> severity -1 serious
Bug #1000239 [debian-installer] Rescue system won't find root partition, but
insists on /usr
Severity set to 'serious' from 'normal'
> tags = confirmed
Unknown command or malformed arguments to command.
--
10002
erstand what could be going on, for lack of
> experience. I've only been a Debian user since Woody was in testing.
>
> It's easy to reproduce. Do an expert install with defaults, but partition
> with gpt. Boot the system with the install media, launch a rescue shell, and
&g
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 + moreinfo
Bug #1000239 [debian-installer] Rescue system won't find root partition, but
insists on /usr
Added tag(s) moreinfo.
--
1000239: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1000239
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.de
Hi Tom,
On Sat, Nov 20, 2021 at 01:59:42AM +, TomK wrote:
>Package: debian-installer
>Version: 20210731+deb11u1_amd64
>
>Errors, "No suitable shell found on /dev/sda1"
>
>Cycling through every partition results in what should be /usr being
>selected as the root
Package: debian-installer
Version: 20210731+deb11u1_amd64
Errors, "No suitable shell found on /dev/sda1"
Cycling through every partition results in what should be /usr being selected
as the root partition. This is useless for a rescue syatem, because there some
commands missing.
Your message dated Sat, 30 Oct 2021 18:30:54 +0200
with message-id <20211030183054.906cb9aac22395d0f32a6...@mailbox.org>
and subject line Mass-closing old grub-installer bugs
has caused the Debian Bug report #500079,
regarding Missing root option for other detected Linux OS on dmraid
to be
Your message dated Sat, 30 Oct 2021 18:30:54 +0200
with message-id <20211030183054.906cb9aac22395d0f32a6...@mailbox.org>
and subject line Mass-closing old grub-installer bugs
has caused the Debian Bug report #292513,
regarding LILO/GRUB problems when root is on RAID1
to be marked as done.
tasks: [O]
Install boot loader:[O]
Overall install:[E]
Comments/Problems:
I'm trying to setup a fresh Debian with a BTRFS root and an EXT2 /boot
with the netinstall disk on an OLinuXino Lime 2 (an A20 based SBC).
When I install without BTRFS, but 2 EXT2 partitions, installa
king for a procedure to create a minimal Debian OS Root Filesystems
with Desktop UI.
Do known there is in Debian the package `debos`
Description: Debian OS builder
debos is a tool to make creation of various Debian based OS "images"
simpler. While most other tools focus on spec
Thank you for your reply.
I didn’t know about a tool called debos.
I will investigate.
Thank you for the useful information.
Yuichi Tsujiwaki
On Wed, Jun 02, 2021 at 02:58:23PM +0900, Yuichi Tsujiwaki wrote:
> Hi, how does the debian development team create rootfs with a GUI?
AFAIK not
> If you're using multistrap, could you please tell me where the config file
> is?
> I'm looking for a procedure to create a
Hi, how does the debian development team create rootfs with a GUI?
If you're using multistrap, could you please tell me where the config file
is?
I'm looking for a procedure to create a minimal Debian OS Root Filesystems
with Desktop UI.
Thank you for your reply.
Control: reassigne -1 user-setup
Hello,
David Mandelberg, le ven. 09 avril 2021 23:06:06 -0400, a ecrit:
> https://www.debian.org/releases/bullseye/amd64/apbs04.en.html section
> B.4.5 talks about using "!" in passwd/root-password-crypted:
> > The passwd/root-password-c
tation is that distributions should now
> put service override files to set this environment variable.
>
> Thus user-setup should create the appropriate configuration file when
> the root account is not configured. Maybe this should be controlled
> by some low priority debconf questio
Source: installation-guide
Severity: normal
Tags: d-i
Hi,
https://www.debian.org/releases/bullseye/amd64/apbs04.en.html section
B.4.5 talks about using "!" in passwd/root-password-crypted:
The passwd/root-password-crypted and passwd/user-password-crypted
variables can also be pres
> > I am also going to guess that Deepin, like Ubuntu, defaults to giving
> > > > you a user account with sudo access, and no root password. You can
> > > > achieve that in Debian as well, by doing something special during the
> > > > installation. In all cas
Your message dated Mon, 8 Feb 2021 16:21:16 +0100
with message-id
and subject line Re: Bug#977133: debootstrap: Add ${HOME}/.local/bin to default
non-root PATH
has caused the Debian Bug report #977133,
regarding debootstrap: Add ${HOME}/.local/bin to default non-root PATH
to be marked as done
> I would be willing to sponsor this but I'm not sure whether such
> a change would be a good idea a little over a week from the soft
> freeze.
Can you sponsor the upload [1] already? This won't add the package
to the installer, but we will decide to have it include in bullseye
(which I really hop
On 2/4/21 8:16 PM, Stephan Lachnit wrote:
>> I would be willing to sponsor this but I'm not sure whether such
>> a change would be a good idea a little over a week from the soft
>> freeze.
>
> Can you sponsor the upload [1] already? This won't add the package
> to the installer, but we will decide
> I would be willing to sponsor this but I'm not sure whether such
> a change would be a good idea a little over a week from the soft
> freeze.
Cool. I've revisited it and I have it working in a Virtual Machine.
Will try a physical ASAP, but I think it's ready for testing.
Regards,
Stephan
Since we now have f2fs support in parted [1], we could
go back to adding partman-f2fs to d-i. It's been quite
a while since I did this, so I'll have to some reading
again. But is anyone even interested to sponsor this
before the freeze? Else, the effort is not really worth
it (for now).
Regards,
S
On 2/2/21 9:44 PM, Stephan Lachnit wrote:
> Since we now have f2fs support in parted [1], we could
> go back to adding partman-f2fs to d-i. It's been quite
> a while since I did this, so I'll have to some reading
> again. But is anyone even interested to sponsor this
> before the freeze? Else, the
Eingehängt auf
udev 468M 0 468M0% /dev
tmpfs 99M2,6M 96M3% /run
/dev/mapper/rootvg-root 4,0G3,6G 164M 96% /
tmpfs491M 0 491M0% /dev/shm
tmpfs5,0M4,0K 5,0M1% /run
Mirko Vogt writes:
> Looking at /usr/share/initramfs-tools/scripts/local-top/lvm2 more
> closely, passing a UUID also wouldn't trigger a `vgchange -ay` here.
> But a path like /dev/mapper/X would.
> So maybe the question is rather: how to make os-prober return a
> "
Looking at /usr/share/initramfs-tools/scripts/local-top/lvm2 more
closely, passing a UUID also wouldn't trigger a `vgchange -ay` here.
But a path like /dev/mapper/X would.
So maybe the question is rather: how to make os-prober return a
"root=/dev/mapper/X" line instead of one containing a UUID(?)
Just adding, this isn't only a feature request but results in
non-bootable systems.
If one of the os-probe'd systems e.g. is also a Debian, it will drop
into an initramfs due to not finding the root device.
This is due to - within the initramfs - the VGs as part of the the LVM
syste
Package: os-prober
Version: 1.77
Severity: important
I noticed when running update-grub on Debian stable and testing, that
the resulting grub.cfg has lines as part of menuentres like:
"linux [..] root=/dev/dm-X"
for found linux installations on other block devices -
Package: flash-kernel
Version: 3.35+deb8u3
Severity: important
Dear Maintainer,
The Bootloader-sets-root field was renamed to Bootloader-Sets-Root in
https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/flash-kernel/-/commit/343eeb3f642c3f4b4cc4ec6591bfa3b6164b8dc7
. It was then renamed/changed to Bootloader
Package: debootstrap
Version: 1.0.123
Severity: normal
X-Debbugs-Cc: witold.bary...@gmail.com
I am not sure if this is bug more for debootstrap or some other package
(base-files?), but:
I think ~/.local/bin should be added to default non-root PATH.
I belive Fedora and Ubuntu already does that
use systemd to
invoke sulogin with the --force option (i.e., if the root account
is locked or has no password, then log in without asking for a
password.) See <https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/7115>.
Personally I'm not sure this is the best idea - it'd be better to ask
for t
Package: debian-installer
Version: 20200314
Severity: wishlist
Now that more and more systems use flash as their main storage, it'd
be really nice if the debian installer would allow creating and using
f2fs for the root partition.
I wasn't sure if this should be reported against debian
l with disabled root user, sudo
command not found
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 administrat
Your message dated Tue, 4 Aug 2020 00:09:01 +0200
with message-id <20200804000901.ada4d3e7ac8e2e0050ab3...@mailbox.org>
and subject line Mass-closing old installation-report bugs
has caused the Debian Bug report #758260,
regarding installation-reports: Root filesystem too small
to be mar
ioning
creates too small root partition
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 n
Your message dated Tue, 4 Aug 2020 00:09:01 +0200
with message-id <20200804000901.ada4d3e7ac8e2e0050ab3...@mailbox.org>
and subject line Mass-closing old installation-report bugs
has caused the Debian Bug report #726077,
regarding installation-reports: Cannot change root mount defaults
1 - 100 of 1290 matches
Mail list logo
