Bug#771190: installation-reports: Screen refresh rate set wrong during installation, discovered on first boot. Do settings manually during installation, please

2014-11-27 Thread gus
Package: installation-reports Severity: important Tags: d-i Dear Maintainer, *** Please consider answering these questions, where appropriate *** * What led up to the situation? * What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or ineffective)? * What was the outcome of this

Bug#770078: ifupdown: interfaces(5) falsely claims that interfaces.d is included by default on new installs

2014-11-27 Thread Andrew Shadura
I'd really appreciate any comment on this from d-i maintainers. -- Cheers, Andrew -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CACujMDNkR2U7=_Tke2JpqU=bsnesx79

Bug#770078: ifupdown: interfaces(5) falsely claims that interfaces.d is included by default on new installs

2014-11-27 Thread Cyril Brulebois
Andrew Shadura (2014-11-22): > Hello, > > On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 11:15:00 -0700 > Peter Karbaliotis wrote: > > > The interfaces(5) man page claims: > > By default, on a freshly installed Debian system, the interfaces > > file includes a line to source /etc/network/interfaces.d directory. > > b

Bug#770078: ifupdown: interfaces(5) falsely claims that interfaces.d is included by default on new installs

2014-11-27 Thread Andrew Shadura
Hello, On 27 November 2014 at 15:26, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > You probably want to look at debcheckout netcfg; write_interface.c is > most likely the interesting one, along with base-installer.d/40netcfg > and finish-install.d/55netcfg-copy-config which you may want to check > as well since they

Bug#770078: ifupdown: interfaces(5) falsely claims that interfaces.d is included by default on new installs

2014-11-27 Thread Cyril Brulebois
Control: tag -1 patch Andrew Shadura (2014-11-27): > Hello, > > On 27 November 2014 at 15:26, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > > You probably want to look at debcheckout netcfg; write_interface.c is > > most likely the interesting one, along with base-installer.d/40netcfg > > and finish-install.d/55net

Processed: Re: Bug#770078: ifupdown: interfaces(5) falsely claims that interfaces.d is included by default on new installs

2014-11-27 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing control commands: > tag -1 patch Bug #770078 [debian-installer] ifupdown: interfaces(5) falsely claims that interfaces.d is included by default on new installs Added tag(s) patch. -- 770078: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=770078 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow

Processed: severity of 771190 is wishlist

2014-11-27 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > severity 771190 wishlist Bug #771190 [installation-reports] installation-reports: Screen refresh rate set wrong during installation, discovered on first boot. Do settings manually during installation, please Severity set to 'wishlist' from 'impo

Bug#770078: ifupdown: interfaces(5) falsely claims that interfaces.d is included by default on new installs

2014-11-27 Thread Andrew Shadura
Hello, On 27 November 2014 at 16:07, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > Am I correct in assuming that such an /e/n/i file with an older ifupdown > doesn't cause any issues? I'd also like to know whether it can cause any > issues with other tools parsing/using/abusing /e/n/i (n-m notably). It does. Actuall

Bug#770078: ifupdown: interfaces(5) falsely claims that interfaces.d is included by default on new installs

2014-11-27 Thread Cyril Brulebois
Andrew Shadura (2014-11-27): > On 27 November 2014 at 16:07, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > > Am I correct in assuming that such an /e/n/i file with an older ifupdown > > doesn't cause any issues? I'd also like to know whether it can cause any > > issues with other tools parsing/using/abusing /e/n/i (n

Bug#770078: ifupdown: interfaces(5) falsely claims that interfaces.d is included by default on new installs

2014-11-27 Thread Andrew Shadura
Hello, On 27 November 2014 at 16:28, Cyril Brulebois wrote: >> source /etc/network/interfaces.d/* > This would probably be safer at this point of the release cycle indeed. > We can think about switching it early during the stretch release cycle. > That means the current documentation will still

unblock: busybox/1:1.22.0-14

2014-11-27 Thread Michael Tokarev
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Please unblock package busybox. Last upload has one security bugfix (CVE-2014-4607, #768945), the fix is from upstream stable branch, fixing an integer overflow in lzo decompressor; it adds

Bug#770078: ifupdown: interfaces(5) falsely claims that interfaces.d is included by default on new installs

2014-11-27 Thread Cyril Brulebois
Control: reassign -1 netcfg 1.125 Andrew Shadura (2014-11-27): > On 27 November 2014 at 16:28, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > >> source /etc/network/interfaces.d/* > > > This would probably be safer at this point of the release cycle indeed. > > We can think about switching it early during the stretc

Processed: Re: Bug#770078: ifupdown: interfaces(5) falsely claims that interfaces.d is included by default on new installs

2014-11-27 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing control commands: > reassign -1 netcfg 1.125 Bug #770078 [debian-installer] ifupdown: interfaces(5) falsely claims that interfaces.d is included by default on new installs Bug reassigned from package 'debian-installer' to 'netcfg'. Ignoring request to alter found versions of bug #77007

Bug#771209: netboot: recommended jessie beta2 fails due to kernel mismatch

2014-11-27 Thread Hermann Lauer
Package: installation-reports Severity: important Tags: d-i Dear Maintainer, there seems to be no checks on the debian ftp servers which hinders disapearing of udeb kernel modules while still referenced from current netboot images. So the "recommended jessie beta2" (debian.org testing) netboot

Re: Bug#771208: unblock: busybox/1:1.22.0-14

2014-11-27 Thread Cyril Brulebois
(Putting on my d-i RM fedora.) Michael Tokarev (2014-11-27): > Please unblock package busybox. Last upload has one security bugfix > (CVE-2014-4607, #768945), the fix is from upstream stable branch, > fixing an integer overflow in lzo decompressor; it adds a Built-Using > control field for busyb

Bug#770078: ifupdown: interfaces(5) falsely claims that interfaces.d is included by default on new installs

2014-11-27 Thread Andrew Shadura
Hello, On 27 November 2014 at 16:48, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > I have the attached patch pending locally; not pushing right now to > avoid an accidental upload while I haven't got around to requesting a > few unblock/unblock-udeb (one of which is about netcfg). Thanks. -- Cheers, Andrew --

Re: Bug#771208: unblock: busybox/1:1.22.0-14

2014-11-27 Thread Michael Tokarev
27.11.2014 19:00, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > (Putting on my d-i RM fedora.) Thank you for your review. > Michael Tokarev (2014-11-27): >> Please unblock package busybox. Last upload has one security bugfix >> (CVE-2014-4607, #768945), the fix is from upstream stable branch, >> fixing an integer o

Bug#771209: marked as done (netboot: recommended jessie beta2 fails due to kernel mismatch)

2014-11-27 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Thu, 27 Nov 2014 17:07:16 +0100 with message-id <20141127160716.gs6...@mraw.org> and subject line Re: Bug#771209: netboot: recommended jessie beta2 fails due to kernel mismatch has caused the Debian Bug report #771209, regarding netboot: recommended jessie beta2 fails due to ker

Bug#764587: installation-reports: After successful installation from usb stick the stick is not recognised on reboot.

2014-11-27 Thread Philip Charles
Brian On Wed, 2014-11-26 at 11:00 +, Brian Potkin wrote: > Hello Philip, > > I'm assuming that since you did not CC the bug that this is intended to > be a private mail. A mistake on my part. > > I originally did something like this with the first eight CD images and > used apt-cdrom. The

Bug#764587: installation-reports: After successful installation from usb stick the stick is not recognised on reboot.

2014-11-27 Thread Brian Potkin
Hello Philip, I'm assuming that since you did not CC the bug that this is intended to be a private mail. On Wed 26 Nov 2014 at 18:22:52 +1300, Philip Charles wrote: > > > I have a USB stick that is used for installing Wheezy and which is > > recognised on reboot. Instead of writing DVD1 to the

Bug#764587: installation-reports: After successful installation from usb stick the stick is not recognised on reboot.

2014-11-27 Thread Philip Charles
> I have a USB stick that is used for installing Wheezy and which is > recognised on reboot. Instead of writing DVD1 to the stick I do the > following: > > 1. Have a FAT16 partition spanning the whole stick. Format as vfat. > > 2. Install GRUB in the MBR and copy the hd-media vmlinuz and initrd.