Today is a new day for your residence. With levels
at their headline-making historic lows, our programs
are better now than ever before. Even if you've recently
closed on a property, now is the time to check your
numbers.
Our advisors are here to help you decide your options.
In fact, did you kno
On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 10:51:42PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
>
> I still don't get why the kernel should complain though ?
Because it can not reread the partition table if it uses some of the
partitions for something - swap (partman automaticaly activates any
existing swap to allow small memory
On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 03:36:14PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> >
> > Or partition we are mounting without formating if its type doesn't
> > correspond to the file system it contains.
>
> Well, i don't think so, not automatically at least.
Partman has to do something with the partition type of s
linux-kernel-di-powerpc-2.6_0.74_powerpc.changes uploaded successfully to
localhost
along with the files:
linux-kernel-di-powerpc-2.6_0.74.dsc
linux-kernel-di-powerpc-2.6_0.74.tar.gz
kernel-image-2.6.8-powerpc-di_0.74_powerpc.udeb
nic-modules-2.6.8-powerpc-di_0.74_powerpc.udeb
nic-extra-
Accepted:
affs-modules-2.6.8-power3-di_0.74_powerpc.udeb
to
pool/main/l/linux-kernel-di-powerpc-2.6/affs-modules-2.6.8-power3-di_0.74_powerpc.udeb
affs-modules-2.6.8-power4-di_0.74_powerpc.udeb
to
pool/main/l/linux-kernel-di-powerpc-2.6/affs-modules-2.6.8-power4-di_0.74_powerpc.udeb
affs-mod
There are disparities between your recently accepted upload and the
override file for the following file(s):
usb-storage-modules-2.6.8-power3-di_0.74_powerpc.udeb: package says priority is
standard, override says extra.
usb-storage-modules-2.6.8-power4-di_0.74_powerpc.udeb: package says priority
On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 01:51:24PM +0200, Anton Zinoviev wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 10:51:42PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> >
> > I still don't get why the kernel should complain though ?
>
> Because it can not reread the partition table if it uses some of the
> partitions for something - s
On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 12:55:18PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
>
> You are meaning that if the kernel uses one of the partitions of the partition
> table, it can then not modify the other ones ?
Yes.
> > 6. When the user finishes partman writes the partition tables to the
> >disks. The kernel
How I can determine which version of partman was in rc1, beta4, etc.?
Anton Zinoviev
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your message dated Thu, 2 Dec 2004 15:52:02 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#266595: installation-reports: [i386] [rc1] [netinst]
reboot fails on SATA root partition
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem h
On Mon, Aug 30, 2004 at 03:04:39PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>Device BootStart EndBlocks Id System
> /dev/hda1 * 1 2349 17758408+ 7 HPFS/NTFS # WIN XP
> /dev/hda2 4695 5168 3583440 41 PPC PReP Boot # IBM
> system parti
On Sat, Aug 28, 2004 at 08:49:36PM -0300, Margarita Manterola wrote:
>
> I know it's not partman's fault that the partition table is broken, but
> since it can be fixed using fdisk, there should be a way of fixing it
> through partman... Or at least a big warning stating that the partition
> table
Why the bug report #269761 is not sent to debian-boot? Some mailing
list filter has blocked it?
Anton Zinoviev
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Package: debian-installer-manual
Severity: normal
Tags: patch
While investigating how to incorporate the install manual into
the websites I saw there is no plain text output yet. I've prepared
a little patch to allow this (xml->single html->text).
The method of using w3m -dump still has some draw
Package: installation-reports
Debian-installer-version: 2004-11-19
uname -a: n.a.
Date: 2004-12-02
Method: Base Install from the official netinstall Sarge Iso.
Machine: Twinhead Efio 121 (aka knows as: Averatec E1200)
Processor: Pentium M - Dothan 1,5
Memory: 512 MByte
Root Device: IDE - Fujitsu M
Forgot the new .xsl file.
Gruesse,
--
Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
www: http://www.djpig.de/
style-html-single.xsl
Description: application/xml
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 271278 debian-installer
Bug#271278: [i386] [20040911] Problems with partitionning
Bug reassigned from package `partman' to `debian-installer'.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking s
Hi!
On Sun, Sep 12, 2004 at 12:41:05PM +0200, Julien Danjou wrote:
>
> Comments/Problems:
> I did not want to delete hd[ac]8 and hd[ac]9, so I deleted everything,
> but them.
> Then, I created /dev/hda1 for /boot as primary, /dev/hd[ac]2 for swap,
> /dev/hd[ac]3 for root. No problem.
>
> But whe
reassign 271278 debian-installer
thanks
I belive that this bug does not belong to partman but either to
partman-md or to some other RAID component.
Anton Zinoviev
On Sun, Sep 12, 2004 at 12:41:05PM +0200, Julien Danjou wrote:
>
> And that the point: because I continued to install the system, it
Your message dated Thu, 2 Dec 2004 18:25:19 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#271828: dependency on libdebian-installer4-dev not needed
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is n
On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 01:58:53PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> Sven Luther wrote:
> > Why ? i can upload the experimental package to unstable, and it be used in
> > d-i, and if sarge fixes are needed upload them through t-p-u, no ?
>
> I think the release managers will tell you this is not a good i
Debian-installer-version:
http://cdimage.debian.org/pub/cdimage-testing/sarge_d-i/ia64/rc2/sarge-ia64-businesscard.iso
uname -a: Linux itanium.rose.hp.com 2.4.27-1-itanium #1 Fri Sep 3 12:13:22 MDT
2004 ia64 GNU/Linux
Method: Businesscard cdrom
Machine: 1st-generation itanium, similar to HP rx260
On Thu, 2 Dec 2004, Christian Perrier wrote:
> Quoting Paul Telford ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > So the comments in the example preseed file[1] which say "If you prefer to
> > configure the network manually, here's how" are essentially meaningless?
> > Why is there even an option if it is going to be
Package: installation-reports
Debian-installer-version: rc2 business card iso
uname -a: Linux debian 2.4.27-1-generic #1 Sat Sep 4 01:15:04 CEST 2004 alpha
GNU/Linux
Date: 12/01/2004
Method: Boot from cdrom w/ businesscard iso
Machine: AlphaServer 1200 5/533 4MB
Processor: Alpha EV56 (system typ
Package: debian-installer-manual
Severity: normal
Tags: patch
I would propose to move the reference to section 8.3 from lilo-installer
to os-prober, because this seems more appropriate. You might consider
ignoring the other more cosmetic parts of the patch, although I think we
really should stop t
On Thu, 2 Dec 2004, Paul Telford wrote:
> Machine: 1st-generation itanium, similar to HP rx2600 (actually a prototype
> machine)
Just in case anyone is keeping track, that should read "rx4610".
Thanks,
--
Paul Telford | 1024D/431B38BA | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
C903 0E85
Paul Telford wrote:
> The comments in the example preseed file read to me as if static
> addressing was tested & working...
I did test it, but I did not think to test it with nonstandard gateways
or netmasks, so I didn't notice that it was ignoring my preseeded values
for those.
--
see shy jo
Package: installation-reports
Debian-installer-version: rc2 businesscard iso
Machine: 1st-generation itanium, similar to HP rx4610
Processor: 500Mhz Itanium
Memory: 1024MB
Root Device: /dev/sda on QLogic QLA12160
Output of lspci and lspci -n:
Base System Installation Checklist:
[O] = OK, [E] = E
palo-installer_0.0.6_hppa.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
palo-installer_0.0.6.dsc
palo-installer_0.0.6.tar.gz
palo-installer_0.0.6_hppa.udeb
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsu
Quoting Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Someone has sent me proofreaded Polish translation and he found many typos,
> and some gramatical corrections.
> Is it possible to include it for sarge?
That means rebuilding and compiling all relevant packages. Nothing has
been decided on
Accepted:
palo-installer_0.0.6.dsc
to pool/main/p/palo-installer/palo-installer_0.0.6.dsc
palo-installer_0.0.6.tar.gz
to pool/main/p/palo-installer/palo-installer_0.0.6.tar.gz
palo-installer_0.0.6_hppa.udeb
to pool/main/p/palo-installer/palo-installer_0.0.6_hppa.udeb
Announcing to [EMAIL PRO
Your message dated Thu, 02 Dec 2004 13:17:03 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#282851: fixed in palo-installer 0.0.6
has caused the attached Bug report 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 n
Attached a first draft for a new reactivating-win document.
Comments welcome.
Gruesse,
--
Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
www: http://www.djpig.de/
Index: build/entities/common.ent
===
--- build/entities/common.ent (revision
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Anton,
On Thursday 02 December 2004 14:39, Anton Zinoviev wrote:
> How I can determine which version of partman was in rc1, beta4, etc.?
One way would be to download the netinst CD and see what version is
in /pool.
If that's a problem for you, I
On Thursday 02 December 2004 15:16, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> While investigating how to incorporate the install manual into
> the websites I saw there is no plain text output yet. I've prepared
> a little patch to allow this (xml->single html->text).
Thanks, I'll try to incorporate them in (the
On Thursday 02 December 2004 15:28, Anton Zinoviev wrote:
> Notice that hda7 and hda8 start before the end of hda6. This partition
> table is broken (some partitioning tools are making such partition
> tables) and in order to be safe the partitioning program of the
> installer refuses to work with
On Thu, 2004-12-02 at 06:36 +0100, Christian Perrier wrote:
> Hmmm, you should have kept the original bug number of your install
> report in copy. Doing so, and keeping your whole answer.
Sorry for breaking the thread, I am more used to forums than lists...
>
>
> Quoting Norval Watson ([EMAIL PRO
yaboot-installer_1.0.2_powerpc.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
yaboot-installer_1.0.2.dsc
yaboot-installer_1.0.2.tar.gz
yaboot-installer_1.0.2_powerpc.udeb
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a su
Quoting Joey Hess ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> I did test it, but I did not think to test it with nonstandard gateways
> or netmasks, so I didn't notice that it was ignoring my preseeded values
> for those.
I should really blame myself for not having thinked about testing
this, as I have exactly such
Sven Luther wrote:
> Well, i don't really anticipate doing loads of parted 1.6.11 uploads anyway,
> but i guess this is moot, since it seems there is a rough consensus among the
> RMs to get the experimental parted in sarge. Or at least try to do so.
>
> Unless you really like to reply to all the
Your message dated Thu, 2 Dec 2004 21:39:29 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#283595: SOLVED: Dual SATA controllers on GA-K8NS Pro
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not th
Your message dated Thu, 02 Dec 2004 15:49:50 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#243669: fixed in yaboot-installer 1.0.2
has caused the attached Bug report 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
Accepted:
yaboot-installer_1.0.2.dsc
to pool/main/y/yaboot-installer/yaboot-installer_1.0.2.dsc
yaboot-installer_1.0.2.tar.gz
to pool/main/y/yaboot-installer/yaboot-installer_1.0.2.tar.gz
yaboot-installer_1.0.2_powerpc.udeb
to pool/main/y/yaboot-installer/yaboot-installer_1.0.2_powerpc.udeb
base-config_2.59_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
base-config_2.59.dsc
base-config_2.59.tar.gz
base-config_2.59_all.deb
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble?
Your message dated Thu, 02 Dec 2004 16:02:14 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#282632: fixed in base-config 2.59
has caused the attached Bug report 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 y
Accepted:
base-config_2.59.dsc
to pool/main/b/base-config/base-config_2.59.dsc
base-config_2.59.tar.gz
to pool/main/b/base-config/base-config_2.59.tar.gz
base-config_2.59_all.deb
to pool/main/b/base-config/base-config_2.59_all.deb
Announcing to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Closing bugs: 282632
Thank
On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 03:19:47PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> Sven Luther wrote:
> > Well, i don't really anticipate doing loads of parted 1.6.11 uploads anyway,
> > but i guess this is moot, since it seems there is a rough consensus among
> > the
> > RMs to get the experimental parted in sarge. Or
I just installed Sarge/NetInst i386. On bootup I get error 18 when Grub tries
to start. What is error 18 and how do I fix
it?
-
This message was sent using Midwest Tel Net Web Based Mail.
http://www.mwt.net/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTEC
On (02/12/04 17:26), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I just installed Sarge/NetInst i386. On bootup I get error 18 when Grub tries
> to start. What is error 18 and how do I fix
> it?
Googling for grub error 18 debian provided this:
http://wiki.linuxquestions.org/wiki/GRUB#Error_18
Regards
Clive
--
Dear All,I have set up a local debian-mirror under /home/http/debian, and modified the /usr/share/debian-cd/tasks/debian-installer, removed some 2.4.27 relative stuffs. I only want 2.6 stuff, and I want the iso to be as small as possible.I run the following steps:# cd /usr/share/debian-cd# vi CONF.
Dear Friends,
THe question I would like to have had answered, to wit, is the dual boot
disk geometry problem solved, has been. Thanks.
For the record, when using 2.6 to boot the cd, one sees that no matter
what, when checking the c,h,s before committing to the formatting, it
remains x,16,63, i
Thu, 02 Dec 2004 22:36:31 -0600
CLIENT: 120-0377-950
Good day:
You must complete our form to finalize the process.
Our company can offer a deal 3.35% at this very moment.
We appreciate your business and look forward to following up with you.
Please visit our site
http://www.moreupto.com/
Ange
> That said, if we had done the change in august, then we would not have this
> problem anymore now, so the whole discussion comes down to if we will release
> this year yet (highly unlikely), or 6 or more onth from now.
As a side remark in this thread, it would certainly be nice if we
don't rea
> rc2 businesscard install, automated via preseed/url file. On my initial
> attempt I booted with:
> 0 languagechooser/language-name=English preseed/url=http://
> debconf/priority=critical
That one may be tricky...as I'm doing nearly the same with my
"babelbox" which autoinstalls itself in a
54 matches
Mail list logo
