Re: Bug#1060134: kmod-udeb vs busybox-udeb: agree on who ships depmod

On Apr 26, Michael Tokarev wrote: > So, should I disable module utils in busybox-udeb now? I think so. > Is kmod udeb ready and used in d-i already, or does it need some > prep first? AFAIK it works. -- ciao, Marco signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: Bug#1060134: kmod-udeb vs busybox-udeb: agree on who ships depmod

On Jan 06, Michael Tokarev wrote: > Yes, some utils in busybox aren't as good as regular implementations. For Yes. Nowadays kmod has many more features related to compressed modules and verification of signatures. Can we agree that kmod should provide these programs for d-i? Or can the d-i

Bug#1036523: should not enable non-free-firmware on virtualized systems

On May 22, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > For the record: non-free-firmware can be enabled because (1) the kernel logs > firmware requests, (2) available hardware matches modalias information, (3) > CPU matches one with microcode. > > (1) and (2) definitely make sense in a virtualized system as well:

Bug#1036523: should not enable non-free-firmware on virtualized systems

Source: hw-detect Version: 1.155 Severity: normal Tags: d-i When bookworm is installed on a virtualized system, the non-free-firmware component will be enabled even if this is not needed: firmwares cannot be loaded on virtualized systems because guests usually lack direct access to the

Bug#1033488: should not use dpkg --print-architecture

Source: flash-kernel Version: 3.106 Severity: normal I am currently cross-grading an ARM system from armhf to arm64, and flash-kernel generates a non-working boot.scr file because dpkg --print-architecture in get_boot_cmd() returns armhf instead of arm64. -- ciao, Marco signature.asc

Bug#926699: Transition to usrmerge has started

On Sep 19, Andreas Beckmann wrote: > Shouldn't that fail in such a broken environment? Definitely yes, I will have a look later today. The main issue can only be fixed in the libc packages (which would be wonderful, because then we could stop creating the biarch links and directories on all

Re: partman, growlight, discoverable partitions, and fun

On Sep 27, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > Not for me, though. Debian has always followed the philosophy to be a > universal > operating system, which also meant that we can't (immediately) use all the new > technologies and features that other distributions or upstream projects > develop.

Re: RFC: raising ca-certificates package Priority to standard or important

On Jan 21, Julien Cristau wrote: > So I'd like to raise the priority of ca-certificates from optional to > at least standard, as a signal that it should be installed on Good idea: I think that "standard" is appropriate. -- ciao, Marco signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: Bug#958397: Missing 60-block.rules breaks grub-installer

On Apr 21, Michael Biebl wrote: > We'd probably have to check them, if e.g. they need special system > groups, call external tools etc. > The udev-udeb (and initramfs-tools integration) was mostly taken over > as-is from the old udev package. So Marco might know more why the > initramfs hook and

Re: Bug#941853: crypt(3) should be provided by libxcrypt

On Oct 07, Aurelien Jarno wrote: Dear debian-boot: for the benefit of the ftpmasters, please confirm that you have no objections to src:libxcrypt generating a libcrypt1-udeb package (initially in experimental) which will provide crypt(3) currently in the libc udeb. > I guess we should keep

Re: Bug#926699: libc6-{i386,x32}: installing, removing, reinstalling in a --merged-usr system results in unmerged /lib{32,x32}

Control: severity -1 normal On Aug 22, Marco d'Itri wrote: > Another option is agreeing that this cannot be fixed in a sane and > practical way until non-merged systems have to be supported, and > document somewhere that if anybody does this install-remove-reinstall > dan

Re: Bug#926699: libc6-{i386,x32}: installing, removing, reinstalling in a --merged-usr system results in unmerged /lib{32,x32}

On Aug 19, Aurelien Jarno wrote: Thank you for expressing your position in more detail. > usrmerge works by moving all data from /lib into /usr/lib and then > creating a symlink /lib -> /usr/lib. The same is done for the biarch > or triarch directories, namely /lib32, /lib64, /libx32 and

Re: Bug#926699: libc6-{i386,x32}: installing, removing, reinstalling in a --merged-usr system results in unmerged /lib{32,x32}

On Aug 17, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > One package should be responsible for providing those links so that > glibc is not the last package using them. The same way that base-files > ensure that some directories are present. usrmerge is only needed to be installed during the conversion of a

Re: Bug#926699: libc6-{i386,x32}: installing, removing, reinstalling in a --merged-usr system results in unmerged /lib{32,x32}

On Aug 17, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > > > The preinst scripts could check whether the package is being installed > > > in a --merged-usr environment and create (dangling) symlinks if > > > /usr/lib{32,x32} is missing. And postrm remove could recreate them if > > > they went missing. Yes: this is

Re: Bug#914897: debootstrap, buster: Please disabled merged /usr by default

On Dec 02, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > One thing that has not been answered yet in this discussion (and if the > TC is to make a decision about it, I think it should be) is "why are we > doing this". That is, what is the problem that usrmerge is meant to > solve, and how does it attempt to solve

Re: Processed: block 839046 with 134758

On Aug 01, Guillem Jover wrote: > I don't know whether someone is continuously checking for this kind of > problem within Debian, besides the usual checks that Ralf Treinen is I am: there is a script to do this in the usrmerge package. -- ciao, Marco signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: Processed: block 839046 with 134758

On May 07, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: > > block 839046 with 134758 > Bug #839046 [debootstrap] debootstrap: enable --merged-usr by default > Bug #839162 [debootstrap] Enabled merged-/usr by default I totally disagree that this is in any way a blocking issue: it is

Bug#839046: debootstrap: enable --merged-usr by default

On Dec 23, md wrote: > On Dec 20, Julien Cristau wrote: > > > > This change was reverted in 1.0.87 as dpkg-shlibdeps didn't cope > > > properly with a merged-usr system. Thus reopening this bug report for > > > that version. > > > > > > The dpkg-shlibdeps bugs has been

Bug#839046: debootstrap: enable --merged-usr by default

On Dec 20, Julien Cristau wrote: > > This change was reverted in 1.0.87 as dpkg-shlibdeps didn't cope > > properly with a merged-usr system. Thus reopening this bug report for > > that version. > > > > The dpkg-shlibdeps bugs has been fixed [1] in the mean time. So it would

Bug#817236: schroot: no access to pseudo-terminals in new chroots

On Mar 09, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > If nobody (esp. Ben & Marco) objects to them, I guess you could push > them to master once alioth is back? I think Simon did a great job analyzing this, so I fully support merging his patch. -- ciao, Marco signature.asc Description: PGP

Re: schroot: no access to pseudo-terminals in new chroots

On Nov 20, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > > This is not needed at all from Linux 4.7. The open operation on > > /dev/ptmx automatically looks up the sibling pts/ directory. (Also, > > every mount of devpts is a 'new instance'.) > > > > It seems to me that the change in debootstrap

Re: Bug#844220: maybe not /usr-merged but 0700 for / could be the culprit here

On Nov 18, Holger Levsen wrote: > someone mailed me privately and pointed me to this forum post > https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=186056=2 which made me > realize that debootstrap had another change: TARGET is now created with > 0700 permissions and not 0755

Bug#839046: apt-listchanges: changelogs for tglase-nb.lan.tarent.de

On Oct 24, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > > By using the appropriate debootstrap switch. > In d-i? A corresponding switch has not been implemented in d-i, but maybe you can persuade the d-i maintainers to accept a patch. -- ciao, Marco signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Bug#839046: apt-listchanges: changelogs for tglase-nb.lan.tarent.de

On Oct 24, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > This leaves the question: how can we install stretch > without usrmerge? By using the appropriate debootstrap switch. But the real question would be: why would you want to do that? -- ciao, Marco signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Bug#839162: Enabled merged-/usr by default

-- ciao, Marco diff --git a/debian/changelog b/debian/changelog index 27e512c..4e26ac8 100644 --- a/debian/changelog +++ b/debian/changelog @@ -1,3 +1,9 @@ +debootstrap (1.0.84) unstable; urgency=medium + + * Enable merged-/usr by default. + + -- Marco d'Itri <m...@linux.it> Thu, 29 Sep 2

Re: Support for merged-/usr now in debootstrap; default for stretch?

On Sep 14, Felipe Sateler wrote: > I agree that merging /usr is a good thing to do. We should default to > that, and at some point force the merge somehow (via the usrmerge package? To be fair, I have implemented this as a switch only because I expected that somebody would

Re: Bug#810301: merged /usr support for debootstrap

How can we move forward with this? On Aug 04, Marco d'Itri <m...@linux.it> wrote: > On Jul 07, Marco d'Itri <m...@linux.it> wrote: > > > > > > first_stage_install () { > > > > > + case $SUITE in > > > >

Bug#810301: merged /usr support for debootstrap

On Jul 07, Marco d'Itri <m...@linux.it> wrote: > > > > first_stage_install () { > > > > + case $SUITE in > > > > + etch|etch-m68k|jessie|lenny|squeeze|wheezy) ;; > > > > + oldstable|

Bug#810301: merged /usr support for debootstrap

On Jul 05, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > For those wondering (and AFAICT) it seems the only issue here is how to > handle multilib, since multiarch is “hidden” below usr/lib (in > usr/lib/ subdirectories). Indeed. > Actually, this means an architecture which isn't listed doesn't get

Bug#810301: merged /usr support for debootstrap

On Jul 05, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > > + case $ARCH in > > + hurd-*) return 0 ;; > > + amd64) link_dir="lib32 lib64 libx32" ;; [...] > I don't think having to play catch up with src:glibc is a good idea. > Can't that be determined automatically instead of

Bug#810301: merged /usr support for debootstrap

On Jul 05, Andreas Henriksson wrote: > I'm personally keen on seeing this move forward. As far as I'm aware > there are no real blockers for this right now (since #817168 was recently > fixed). If you're aware of any issues please tell me and I'd be happy > to help out. Hoping

Re: Should apt-transport-https be Priority: Important ? (Re: own cloud task in tasksel?)

On Mar 17, Charles Plessy wrote: > have you followed the part of the discussion related to privacy ? This is the Yes: I agree that if somebody has a privacy fetish then TOR is the correct solution since packages can still be identified by traffic analisys. > main reason

Re: own cloud task in tasksel?

On Mar 14, James Bromberger wrote: > - bootlogd > - sysvinit > - systemd > - systemd-sysv If you are using systemd (which you do, since you installed systemd-sysv) then you do not need the transitional package sysvinit and bootlogd will be useless as well. -- ciao,

Re: own cloud task in tasksel?

On Mar 10, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote: > What are the minimal set of of packages then that should be installed in > every cloud image? Whatever is needed to boot it and let someone or something ssh on it. -- ciao, Marco signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: own cloud task in tasksel?

On Mar 09, Charles Plessy wrote: > This reminds me #696154 ("Please install 'less' by default on official Debian > AMIs."). Basically, there is a tension between: Not really, but this is an important issue as well. I am very interested in working on reducing the footprint of

Re: own cloud task in tasksel?

On Mar 08, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote: > with more and more cloud provider publishing images, and the Debian > project wanting to be able to rebuild those images, i wonder if it makes > sense to have an own cloud task, that installs basic packages that are > needed by cloud

Bug#813232: debootstrap: Two-staged bootstrapping with --second-stage broken

On Feb 06, Marco d'Itri <m...@linux.it> wrote: > > Since the content of /dev is architecture independent, a possible fix > > would be to move the call to setup_devices() in every release script > > from the very beginning of the second stage to the very end

Bug#571136: 1.0.76 breaks qemu'd debootstrap (1.0.78)

On Feb 11, Steve McIntyre wrote: > Marco: this is continuing fallout from *your* changes. If you wish to > keep any shred of credibility, you might want to follow through here > and test your proposed fix yourself. Jason has helpfully posted a test > case that demonstrates the

Bug#571136: 1.0.76 breaks qemu'd debootstrap (1.0.78)

On Feb 10, Jason Heeris wrote: > I've just tried a live-build cross build of an armhf image from a stretch > amd64 > VM, with debootstrap 1.0.78, and had it fail this way too. This is about #813232. I posted a candidate patch, but nobody cared. Feel free to test it and

Bug#813232: debootstrap: Two-staged bootstrapping with --second-stage broken

On Feb 01, Marco d'Itri <m...@linux.it> wrote: > Since the content of /dev is architecture independent, a possible fix > would be to move the call to setup_devices() in every release script > from the very beginning of the second stage to the very end of the first > s

Bug#813232: debootstrap: Two-staged bootstrapping with --second-stage broken

On Jan 30, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > Since the upgrade to version 1.0.76 it's no longer possible to create chroots > with --foreign and a consequential --second-stage which is particularly useful > when creating a base system for a foreign architecture.

Bug#812811: Incorrect permissions on device nodes

On Jan 26, Robie Basak wrote: > mk-sbuild (from ubuntu-dev-tools) is creating chroots with a broken > /dev/null (it is 644). This breaks sbuild for me. I believe this is due > to a regression in debootstrap caused by your fix to bug 571136 Correct. The attached patch

Re: Bug#811345: setupcon not run

On Jan 23, Samuel Thibault wrote: > Should udev or systemd perhaps provide some hook to configure a > just-created VT? Maybe a rule like this one? ACTION=="add", KERNEL=="tty[1-9]|tty[1-9][0-9]", RUN+="..." -- ciao, Marco signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: Bug#810860: usrmerge: System cannot be rebooted after partial usrmerge installation

Control: clone 810860 -1 Control: severity -1 important Control: reassign -1 initramfs-tools Control: tag -1 patch Control: retitle -1 initramfs-tools does not follow recursive symlinks initramfs-tools needs this patch to be able to resolve recursive symlinks, or else the system will not boot

Bug#810301: technical reason for "merged /usr support" in debootstrap

Control: tag -1 -moreinfo On Jan 09, Geert Stappers wrote: > * It is not clear what problem is being fixed. It allows to support new use cases like OS snapshots, real read only OS filesystems, real shared (maybe networked) OS filesystems and stateless computers. For a

Bug#571136: Fwd: Re: Bug#571136: please remove useless devices from devices.tar.gz

On Jan 10, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > We have a bug report with a patch by Marco against debootstrap (see > attachment), which changes how devices are generated; I can't really > tell how much this might affect all of you (especially with debootstrap It is not supposed to, since

Bug#571136: please remove useless devices from devices.tar.gz

On Jan 08, Marco d'Itri <m...@linux.it> wrote: > If there are some doubts that devices.tar.gz could still be needed in > the future then I would start with a smaller patch which keeps all the > old code around. Here it is. If somebody will report valid uses for devices.tar.gz th

Bug#571136: please remove useless devices from devices.tar.gz

On Dec 31, Marco d'Itri <m...@linux.it> wrote: > a) submit a patch which rips out of debootstrap all the devices.tar.gz >stuff, or And here it is. -- ciao, Marco diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile index 1020cbc..0bbb2c0 100644 --- a/Makefile +++ b/Makefile @@ -2,17 +2,9

Bug#810301: merged /usr support for debootstrap

Package: debootstrap Version: 1.0.75 Severity: normal Tags: d-i patch User: m...@linux.it Usertags: usrmerge After a discussion on #debian-boot it is my understanding that the d-i developers would prefer for debootstrap to create a merged /usr filesystem layout by default, and eventually add a

Bug#810301: merged /usr support for debootstrap

And here comes the patch... Please note that it must not be applied until it will be possible to uninstall the usrmerge package from a system having installed a reasonable selection of packages. -- ciao, Marco diff --git a/debootstrap b/debootstrap index 2a959bb..80d6a7a 100755 ---

Bug#571136: please remove useless devices from devices.tar.gz

On Jan 08, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > debootstrap is not only used to install Debian on Debian, and being a > tad too aggressive with this removal might not be the best move forward. I welcome reporting use cases which would require a full static /dev. The only one I can think

Bug#571136: please remove useless devices from devices.tar.gz

On Dec 30, Marco d'Itri <m...@linux.it> wrote: > makedev has been orphaned for years and deboostrap should just use > mknod, without even devices.tar.gz. Dear debootstrap maintainers, what do you want me to do? a) submit a patch which rips out of debootstrap all the devices.tar.

Bug#571136: please remove useless devices from devices.tar.gz

On Feb 23, Marco d'Itri <m...@linux.it> wrote: > devices.tar.gz should contain only the devices which are strictly > needed, even if udev is not installed the others can be created by > makedev. 2015 update: the correct[1] list of devices which should be created by deboots

Re: Packages to install be default for Stretch

st...@einval.com wrote: That's the point - laptop-detect is the package that detects *if* you're on a laptop... But why this has to happen on the target instead of in d-i? -- ciao, Marco -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble?

Re: Packages to install be default for Stretch

On May 05, Ansgar Burchardt ans...@debian.org wrote: I would like to re-evaluate what we change by default for Stretch, that Me too. Let's look at the problem from a different point of view. This is what I remove when building cloud images for my employer's infrastructure: dpkg --purge \

Re: Packages to install be default for Stretch

On May 06, Ansgar Burchardt ans...@debian.org wrote: But is this enough reason to keep w3m at priority standard? Personally I would rather use ssh -D or such than bothering with a rather limited text-mode browser. Agreed. -- ciao, Marco pgponSqgK84RI.pgp Description: PGP signature

Re: Packages to install be default for Stretch

On May 06, Ansgar Burchardt ans...@debian.org wrote: Note that I believe this has changed over time: with the advent of VMs and containers the expectations what a system should minimally provide have become smaller. The differences between VMs and normal servers are very small, limited only

Bug#783264: Bug#783247: Please don't install acpid and acpi-support-base

On Apr 28, Wouter Verhelst wou...@debian.org wrote: - Acpi is a useful command-line tool to easily read values of things So basically you are saying that it is common use case is laptops with no good management GUI. This is not enough to make it a candidate for magic installation by hw-detect,

Bug#783247: Please don't install acpid and acpi-support-base

On Apr 25, Bjørn Mork bj...@mork.no wrote: Indeed they are not needed when systemd is used (but are still required on sysvinit systems). Are you sure about this? It was my first reaction as well, but then I remembered the troubles I had with logind conflicting with my acpid based setup.

Bug#783247: Please don't install acpid and acpi-support-base

Control: clone 783247 -1 Control: reassign -1 task-laptop Control: retitle -1 task-laptop should not recommend acpi Control: subscribe 783247 Control: subscribe -1 On Apr 24, Michael Biebl bi...@debian.org wrote: A while ago, I already filed a bug to have acpid and acpi-support-base removed

Bug#766914: What is the policy on audio group? and, proposal of a new group for the jack audio server

On Oct 27, Kaj Ailomaa zeque...@mousike.me wrote: Ok, so you are for removing audio group from user default groups? Eventually, yes. Would these be able to be tagged with seat as you mention? Actually the correct tag is uaccess, and /lib/udev/rules.d/70-uaccess.rules will already do it for

Re: More tasks option in Tasksel: what tasks do you want there? (reloaded)

On Sep 09, Paul Wise p...@debian.org wrote: Isn't tasksel for people with no expectations? People who know something about the technology they are looking for will install the relevant packages instead of following tasksel recommendations. Tasksel is not about recommendations: its purpose is

Bug#571136: please remove useless devices from devices.tar.gz

retitle 571136 debootstrap should not use makedev? thanks Md I really really wish that debootstrap could stop creating the /dev/ram* devices which have been useless since the end of 2.4 kernels [...] bdale Md/infinity: the real fix for /dev/ram* is probably for d-i to stop using

Re: Bug#681285: RM: module-init-tools -- ROM; replaced by kmod

d-i people, please confirm that now module-init-tools can be safely removed from the archive. On Sep 04, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl alexan...@schmehl.info wrote: tags 681285 +moreinfo thanks * Alexander Reichle-Schmehl toli...@debian.org [120903 15:35]: Could you please confirm that it is

Re: Bug#681285: RM: module-init-tools -- ROM; replaced by kmod

d-i people, please confirm that now module-init-tools can be safely removed from the archive. On Sep 04, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl alexan...@schmehl.info wrote: * Alexander Reichle-Schmehl toli...@debian.org [120903 15:35]: Could you please confirm that it is now save to remove

Bug#686970: Inconsistent ipv6 handling of localhost in netbase and netcfg

On Sep 17, Philipp Kern pk...@debian.org wrote: True, but somehow I feel that freeze time is not the time to change this. I disagree, netcfg should be fixed. There is plenty of time to look at any fallback, and even reverting the change if needed. This is 2012, Europe and Asia are out of IPv4

Re: Towards d-i wheezy beta 3

On Sep 10, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh h...@debian.org wrote: I'd like to see it recommend the instalation of (or just install by default) system processor microcode update packages when non-free is enabled on a x86 arch (i386 or amd64) and the running processor is either Intel or AMD (easily

Re: Reviewing/unblocking udev/175-7

On Aug 25, Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org wrote: 1. This one appears twice: + * Moved 60-persistent-input.rules back from udev-gtk-udeb to udev-udeb. +(Closes: #666223) I suspect a copy/paste failure, since 50-udev-default.rules was moved to, but not mentioned in the changelog? It

Re: please unblock kmod

On Aug 18, Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org wrote: It was uploaded before the freeze cutoff, but it needs an ack by the d-i team. What does this fix? The important changes seem to be in the previous version already, the remaining changes are essentially in the testsuite AFAICT? There

please unblock kmod

It was uploaded before the freeze cutoff, but it needs an ack by the d-i team. -- ciao, Marco signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Bug#683790: switching d-i to kmod

Package: debian-installer Severity: important Tags: d-i While the kmod package has been providing since January an udeb package intended as the replacement for module-init-tools-udeb, it was never actually used due to an unfortunate misunderstanding about how d-i is supposed to load modules.

please unblock kmod

It was uploaded before the freeze cutoff, but it needs an ack by the d-i team. -- ciao, Marco signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: please unblock kmod

On Jul 27, Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org wrote: Marco d'Itri m...@linux.it (27/07/2012): It was uploaded before the freeze cutoff, but it needs an ack by the d-i team. NACK for now. Can you be a little more specific? -- ciao, Marco signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Bug#679571: modprobe: no module unix found in modules.dep

On Jul 22, Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk wrote: A spurious warning message that appears for *all* users is important. This will be rectified very soon, sorry for the noise. -- ciao, Marco signature.asc Description: Digital signature

please unblock kmod

It was uploaded before the freeze cutoff, but it needs an ack by the d-i team. -- ciao, Marco signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: Thank you so much for breaking d-i!

On Jul 15, Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org wrote: thanks to the totally uncoordinated switch from module-init-tools to kmod, d-i is badly broken. We're in freeze, neither debian-boot or debian-release were contacted, that's a huge success! WTF are you talking about? We switched from

Re: Thank you so much for breaking d-i!

On Jul 15, Bastian Blank wa...@debian.org wrote: Can you provide the number of the bugreport requesting removal of the udeb? However, why is there a udeb called libkmod2-udeb then? It was discussed on IRC, I think with the busybox maintainer. module-init-tools is not coming back, if d-i

Re: Thank you so much for breaking d-i!

On Jul 15, Marco d'Itri m...@linux.it wrote: This is interesting, because the last time I tried statically linking the udeb it was bigger than the dynamic one. And now I remembered: the udeb is not static because the current udev (which I failed to package timely, and now may be too late

Re: Wheezy release: CDs are not big enough any more...

On May 14, Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk wrote: It is my impression from my visits in the Fall (although I do not have any hard data to support it) that in India and Indonesia network access is generally so slow that even if computers have DVD drives the common media downloaded and used

Re: Wheezy release: CDs are not big enough any more...

On May 14, Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org wrote: I'd support XFCE4 as the default Graphical Desktop Environment and possibly putting GNOME (and KDE) as alternative options. What is the point of providing a default which is not what people usually want? Just document that a normal desktop

Bug#653259: busybox --install is not documented

Package: busybox Version: 1:1.19.3-5 Severity: normal busybox(1) does not mention busybox --install, which could be useful in some emergency situations. I see that /etc/busybox.conf is not documented either. -- ciao, Marco signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Bug#652275: Guided partitioning should not offer separate /usr, /var, and /tmp partitions; leave that to manual partitioning

On Dec 16, Josh Triplett j...@joshtriplett.org wrote: A configuration with everything in one partition needs no extra configuration; anyone who wants such a configuration will like what the guided partitioner comes up with. A configuration with five separate partitions seems almost

Bug#652275: Guided partitioning should not offer separate /usr, /var, and /tmp partitions; leave that to manual partitioning

On Dec 15, Josh Triplett j...@joshtriplett.org wrote: Anyone desiring a setup with more separate partitions should have no trouble using the manual partitioner to create whatever custom configuration they desire. I agree. -- ciao, Marco signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: Bug#633678: Apparently this change happened in may.

On Jul 20, Jérémy Bobbio lu...@debian.org wrote: Since udev 169-1, udev-udeb does not ship edd_id anymore, except 60-persistent-storage.rules still refer to it. This result in an error message: failed to execute '/lib/udev/edd_id' [...]: No such file or directory This message does

please unblock udev

-- ciao, Marco signature.asc Description: Digital signature

please unblock udev

-- ciao, Marco signature.asc Description: Digital signature

please unblock udev

-- ciao, Marco signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: ppp-udeb depending on ppp-modules

Can anybody comment on this? On Aug 06, md wrote: ppp-udeb/armel unsatisfiable Depends: ppp-modules ppp-udeb/s390 unsatisfiable Depends: ppp-modules http://release.debian.org/migration/testing.pl?package=ppp Please advise. ppp-udeb has been this way for a long time, does it need to be

please hint udev

It will also fix the symptoms of #586404. -- ciao, Marco -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100806140418.gb20...@bongo.bofh.it

ppp-udeb depending on ppp-modules

ppp-udeb/armel unsatisfiable Depends: ppp-modules ppp-udeb/s390 unsatisfiable Depends: ppp-modules http://release.debian.org/migration/testing.pl?package=ppp Please advise. ppp-udeb has been this way for a long time, does it need to be changed due to kernel changes? -- ciao, Marco

Re: Bug#565394: pppd available but chat missing

On Jan 15, deb...@x.ray.net wrote: please just add chat to the ppp installer component or as an extra installer component, i guess this is probably a piece of cake to do, but enables any serial line ppp networking which i guess would be a very valuable feature. Please discuss this with the

Re: Bug#586404: udev-udeb: Very slow installation in Squeeze caused by udevadm settle

reassign 586404 debian-installer retitle 586404 d-i must not mix udev packages from different releases thanks On Jul 06, Otavio Salvador ota...@ossystems.com.br wrote: I agree with you; this shouldn't be fixed on udev but a new installer version to be released. Looks like there are no

Re: Bug#586404: udev-udeb: Very slow installation in Squeeze caused by udevadm settle

On Jul 04, Petter Reinholdtsen p...@hungry.com wrote: Looks so, I never expected that the two packages could get out of sync. Is there some way to get the udevadm settle command work also with older udevd versions? Can the protocol be changed? No. -- ciao, Marco signature.asc

Re: Bug#586404: udev-udeb: Very slow installation in Squeeze caused by udevadm settle

On Jul 02, Petter Reinholdtsen p...@hungry.com wrote: Perhaps the udeb should be written to handle upgrades and restart udevd when it is? Not quite sure how to do that, as the postinst Looks so, I never expected that the two packages could get out of sync. But I have no idea about how to

Bug#571136: please remove useless devices from devices.tar.gz

On Feb 24, Ferenc Wagner wf...@niif.hu wrote: FYI, the only devices needed by udev to start are null and console. Aren't those created by devtmpfs? Or will Debian not use that? If devtmpfs is mounted, yes. Currently it is not. And I believe it's a good idea to have these on the underlying

Bug#571136: please remove useless devices from devices.tar.gz

Package: debootstrap Version: 1.0.20 Severity: normal devices.tar.gz should contain only the devices which are strictly needed, even if udev is not installed the others can be created by makedev. At least the ram* devices should be removed because they were needed by initrds and are not useful

Bug#568895: user-setup: Remove some of the default groups, they are unused now

On Feb 08, Jean-Christophe Dubacq jcduba...@free.fr wrote: There are too many groups for the default user, and some of theme are not used any more : audio cdrom floppy video plugdev netdev powerdev dialout are probably not needed. I am not sure that consolekit is the right tool to manage

Bug#568645: setupcon requires udevadm trigger udevadm settle

On Feb 06, Jordi Pujol jordipuj...@gmail.com wrote: udevadm trigger udevadm settle No package should call udevadm trigger, ever. At most, if this is actually needed by the package, the command used should be something like udevadm trigger --action=change --x-match= with the appropriate

Re: Bug#433568: VLANs during install are important

j...@raven.inka.de wrote: 8021q.ko 32328 bytes garp.ko 13460 bytes stp.ko4456 bytes I still do not think that garp.ko and stp.ko are useful in d-i. -- ciao, Marco -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact

Re: Bug#433568: VLANs during install are important

j...@raven.inka.de wrote: The rest would be mostly straight forward: load stp, garp and 8021q modules, Why do you believe that STP and GARP are needed for a network edge node? -- ciao, Marco -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe.

  1   2   3   >