* Frans Pop [2009-01-16 07:28]:
> > /target/etc/initramfs-tools/initramfs.conf
>
> This is really a rather ugly solution because there really is no need to
> generate the initrd twice. It is also RC buggy as it means you mess
> around with another package's conf file, which is a policy violation.
When I get the error...
parted_server: OUT: Error
parted_server: OUT: Error informing the kernel about modifications to
partition /dev/hda5 -- Device or resource busy. This means Linux
won't know about any changes you made to /dev/hda5 until you reboot --
so you shouldn't mount it or use it in an
Hello,
this is a very late follow-up, but apparently just in time, to [1]. I'm
very sorry about the delay (though I never got the follow-up Otavio
promised). Here's a draft of what I think is needed, we'd appreciate if
you (-boot) could go over it, both the general lines and the details,
and tell
* Adeodato Simó [2009-01-16 11:32]:
> Now, for the less easy part: code that gets embedded. Steve Langasek has
> kindly provided us with an initial draft for the list of packages that
> should be checked [2]. This is a subset of D-I's build-dependencies,
Why are they a subset of d-i's build-deps?
* Martin Michlmayr [2009-01-16 12:07]:
> > Now, for the less easy part: code that gets embedded. Steve Langasek has
> > kindly provided us with an initial draft for the list of packages that
> > should be checked [2]. This is a subset of D-I's build-dependencies,
>
> Why are they a subset of d-i'
* Martin Michlmayr [Fri, 16 Jan 2009 12:07:06 +0100]:
> * Adeodato Simó [2009-01-16 11:32]:
> > Now, for the less easy part: code that gets embedded. Steve Langasek has
> > kindly provided us with an initial draft for the list of packages that
> > should be checked [2]. This is a subset of D-I's
* Adeodato Simó [Fri, 16 Jan 2009 11:32:12 +0100]:
> The easy part is the handling of udeb-providing packages: we we'll just
> wait, as usual, for d-i RM ack/nack before unblocking. If an update
> *must* get through, and d-i RM acks it, we'll just copy the previous
> version to a special suite as
On Fri, 16, Jan, 2009 at 12:21:14PM +0100, Adeodato Simó spoke thus..
> Btw, I don't know if it'd be a viable approach or not, but I'll mention
> it nevertheless: I wonder if for squeeze we should do the debian-installer
> uploads to t-p-u instead of unstable. We would still have to ensure
> source
* Mark Hymers [Fri, 16 Jan 2009 11:34:13 +]:
> The other option, which I've been thinking about for a while, would be
> to allow binary packages (deb or udeb) to declare a field such as:
> Source-Depends: foo (= 1.2-1)
> We could then teach dak to hang on to source packages for as long as
>
* Adeodato Simó [2009-01-16 12:12]:
> Frans' original message [1] didn't mention anything about that. He did
> mention, though, stuff coming from udebs from testing. Can it be that
> qcontrol and micro-evtd are grabbed from testing when building the
> installer?
Yes, you're right. See my followi
* Adeodato Simó [Fri, 16 Jan 2009 11:32:12 +0100]:
> Regarding those packages not in sync, both arcboot and mkvmlinuz are a
> translation-only upload, so I'll unblock them. As for gcc-4.3, I think
> 4.3.2-2 is Lenny material, I'll check with doko.
As a third follow-up, here's a list of *all* d-i
* Adeodato Simó [Fri, 16 Jan 2009 14:32:53 +0100]:
> As a third follow-up, here's a list of *all* d-i build-dependencies
Which uncovered a bug in the script; please find the latest version
here:
http://git.debian.org/?p=tools-release/release.git;a=blob;f=scripts/d-i_bdep-sync;hb=HEAD
And apo
Quoting Christian Perrier :
> Well, as the release more or less depends on the installer, we can
> delay its release..:-)
Sabotage! :~)
> I can commit what I have right now. That will anyway be bette rthan
> what we have now.
OK, go ahead.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists
severity 511842 normal
tags 511842 unreproducible
thanks
On Wednesday 14 January 2009, Pyotr Berezhkov wrote:
> Comments/Problems:
> The installer's partitioner appears to be unable to handle the
> situation where an LVM partition already exists on one of the
> computer's disks at the time of inst
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> severity 511842 normal
Bug#511842: installation-reports: Pre-existing LVM partition crashes the
partitioner
Severity set to `normal' from `important'
> tags 511842 unreproducible
Bug#511842: installation-reports: Pre-existing LVM partition crash
On Tuesday 13 January 2009, Jonathan Quick wrote:
> While playing with the DHCP preseeding method for the installer in
> 'auto' mode, I discovered that the 20090112-20:05 daily i386 netboot
> image now asks for a preseed/url despite it being specified by the DHCP
> server - presumeably the check fo
United Nations Foundation
Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Suite 400
Washington, D.C. 20036
Dear Sir/Madam,
UN Foundation Grant.
This is to notify you that you have been chosen by the board of Trustees of the
above International (Charity & Human Developmental Organization) as one of the
final recip
On 16 Jan 09, Frans Pop wrote:
> "This is where is crashed" is not very specific. Please describe the
> excact steps you performed after starting the partitioner and indicate
> when exactly the crash happened.
> I don't see any crash in the first syslog, at most a "hang" (from looking
> at the
Adeodato Simó writes:
> Hello,
>
> this is a very late follow-up, but apparently just in time, to [1]. I'm
> very sorry about the delay (though I never got the follow-up Otavio
> promised). Here's a draft of what I think is needed, we'd appreciate if
> you (-boot) could go over it, both the gener
Christian Perrier writes:
> (sorry for appearing to push hard, here)
>
>> - 2.6.26-13 kernel upload and subsequent kernel udebs uploads
>
>
> Any plans for the kernel udebs uploads, Otavio?
>
> Any help you might need doing that?
>
> I'l be mostly unavailable as of Friday-Saturday but others migh
Martin Michlmayr writes:
> * Martin Michlmayr [2009-01-14 08:59]:
>> arm hasn't finished building but I think it should finish RSN. (The
>> build had to be started again because there was a temporary problem.)
>
> arm is done now.
Is it signed already? It doesn't look installed.
--
O
* Adeodato Simó [Fri, 16 Jan 2009 11:32:12 +0100]:
> Hello,
And hi yet again...
> package|source | testing | unstable | ok
> ---+---+---+---+-
> libgcc1 | gcc-4.3 | 4.3.2-1.1 | 4
* Otavio Salvador [2009-01-15 09:14]:
> > arm is done now.
>
> Is it signed already? It doesn't look installed.
It's installed and on Debian mirrors; maybe your mirror is behind.
--
Martin Michlmayr
http://www.cyrius.com/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org
with
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.26etch1
> retitle 509299 problem with boot drive != system drive
Bug#509299: installation: Error in Windows-Based Debial Installation
Changed Bug title to `problem with boot drive !=
Gostaria de sabe se é possível e como fazer para limitar a taxa de download
por ip numa rede.
Minha versão é o Debian GUN/Linux 4.0
Obrigado.
4minuti.it
/*stile per il body*/
body,html {
text-align: center; /*centra in IE 5.x */
background-image: url('http://www.4minuti.it/images/sfondo_pagina.jpg');
background-attachment: fixed;
font-family:Verdana;
margin:0px 0px 0px 0px;
}
a.titolo{
text-d
Package: installation-reports
Boot method: CD
Image version: http://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/daily-
builds/daily/arch-latest/i386/iso-cd/debian-testing-i386-netinst.iso
07-Jan-2009
UPDATE 2: Partition Numbering Issue Explained
In the initial report and the first update, I noted that during t
On Fri, January 16, 2009 6:57 pm, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Tuesday 13 January 2009, Jonathan Quick wrote:
>> While playing with the DHCP preseeding method for the installer in
>> 'auto' mode, I discovered that the 20090112-20:05 daily i386 netboot
>> image now asks for a preseed/url despite it being s
28 matches
Mail list logo
