Tried to post the below reports and still get this:
> Internal Server Error
>
> The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was
> unable to complete your request.
>
> Please contact the server administrator, [EMAIL PROTECTED] and inform
> them of the time the error occurred, and anything you might have done
> that may have caused the error.
>
> More information about this error may be available in the server error
> log. Apache-AdvancedExtranetServer/2.0.47 (Mandrake Linux/4mdk)
> mod_perl/1.99_09 Perl/v5.8.1 mod_ssl/2.0.47 OpenSSL/0.9.7b Server at
> qa.mandrakesoft.com Port 443
That's the same error I refer to in the below report (when I tried to
report problems with 9.2rc1)...
Note that when connecting to this server, Moz reports a certificate
problem: "localhost" vs "qa.mandrakesoft.com"...
----------------------
Sorry if Mdk would prefer separate problems opened for each issue below --
I consider the state of the installer to be ONE HUGE problem...
Below is my report on 9.2rc1 which I could not post to the bug tracker due
to server problems....
In addition to the problems listed below which I don't see fixed in
9.2rc2, there are more problems that have crept into the installer:
Trying to install with hd.img on floppy and CD[123] images on /dev/hda14
(/ISO), the install goes to hell after installing xpp (end of CD1; see
original report below). Worse, rc2 gets into a loop where I couldn't
Cancel. When I reply No to continuing when it reports an error accessing
a package, it offers to install [almost] from scratch -- it gives the
selection panel for the package groupings I chose; BUT, it then proceeds
ignoring the lengthy individual package selection I worked on -- if
allowed to "install" at this point, what problems can be imagined? After
all, the partitions are no longer freshly formatted...
When asked if I wanted to install LILO, I chose NO because rc1 screwed my
MBR -- BUT... rc2 just IGNORED this selection and screwed my MBR again!!!
&[EMAIL PROTECTED]
When it came to the setup screen where I'm to Configure various items
(mouse, networking, etc...), the panel presented was so SMALL, it could
barely display the word "Mouse" -- had to scroll for EVERY item (right to
access Configure button; left to see WHAT the button applied to...)
Somewhere (forgot where now), there is a dialog that suggests the user
press Next; but there are only OK & Cancel buttons...
There is NO way rc[12] are release candidates... releasing this would
make Mdk a laughing stock and really tick off a lot of users.
As mentioned below, INSTALLATION is the MOST IMPORTANT part of any distro;
without it, it doesn't matter how good the "distro" is rated to be -- it
simply does NOT exist if it can't be installed...!!
>From what I've seen so far, 9.2 is gonna be a bomb if the installer isn't
cleaned up.
For a number of releases, I've be chastised on the lists for UPGRADING; if
this is an example of INSTALLING, I'll be upgrading again -- of course, if
that fails too, Mdk is toast with me and my users -- "thanks; but no
thanks" is my opinion of 9.2 install.
Log files available for the asking since I can't open a bug and attach...
---------------------
My observations on 9.2rc1 are a tad disappointing...
1a. USB mouse and IBM trackpoint worked simultaneously in 9.1 -- after
installing 9.2, even after I told it where to find 9.1 for lilo, the USB
mouse no longer works in my 9.1... Mouse on existing install related to
newly installed lilo..?? Yup... Tried "service usb start" which gave:
Initializing USB controller (usb-uhci): modprobe: Can't open dependencies
file /lib/modules/2.4.22-1mdk/modules.dep (No such file or directory)
[FAILED]
Initializing USB controller (ehci-hcd): modprobe: Can't open dependencies
file /lib/modules/2.4.22-1mdk/modules.dep (No such file or directory)
[FAILED]
Initializing USB controller (usb-ohci): modprobe: Can't open dependencies
file /lib/modules/2.4.22-1mdk/modules.dep (No such file or directory)
[FAILED]
Loading USB printer modprobe: Can't open dependencies file
/lib/modules/2.4.22-1mdk/modules.dep (No such file or directory)
[FAILED]
Huh??!!! WTF! That's not the kernel version in my 9.1...
# uname -a
Linux gypsy.pfortin.com 2.4.22-1mdk #1 Mon Aug 25 11:19:10 EDT 2003 i686
unknown unknown GNU/Linux
# ll /lib/modules
total 1
drwxr-xr-x 4 root root 1024 Jun 4 11:52 2.4.21-0.13mdk/
Even after telling 9.2rc1 installer where 9.1 is, I'm writing this (as we
travel along I-40) on a crippled 9.2 kernel even though it *should* be the
original 9.1...
image=/boot/vmlinuz <====== (1)
label="linux9.1"
root=/dev/hda1
initrd=/boot/initrd-2.4.22-1mdk.img <===========!!!! (2)
read-only
(1) Install was on hda9, so shouldn't this read
[/mnt]/91/boot/vmlinuz...???
(2) Should also read: [/mnt]/91/boot/initrd-2.4.21-0.13mdk.img
where /91 is the name I gave the 9.1 partition during 9.2 install...
This is the classic problem of failing to corectly tell lilo where stuff
really is... See below for more...
1b. X not configured to see both mice:
9.1 config:
Section "InputDevice"
Identifier "Mouse1"
Driver "mouse"
Option "Protocol" "IMPS/2"
Option "Device" "/dev/usbmouse"
Option "ZAxisMapping" "4 5"
EndSection
Section "InputDevice"
Identifier "Mouse2"
Driver "mouse"
Option "Protocol" "PS/2"
Option "Device" "/dev/psaux"
Option "Emulate3Buttons"
Option "Emulate3Timeout" "50"
EndSection
9.2 config:
Section "InputDevice"
Identifier "Mouse1"
Driver "mouse"
Option "Protocol" "IMPS/2"
Option "Device" "/dev/usbmouse"
Option "ZAxisMapping" "4 5"
EndSection
End result: 9.1 now only uses trackpoint (missing kernel libs); 9.2 only
uses usb mouse (missing X config)... :^P
2. Compared to 9.2beta1, 9.2rc1 at least asks for alt OS locations; but
even after telling it, I still had to try to remember the other bootable
modes (failsafe, etc) -- sure would be nice if once told which partition
the other OS is/are on, the installer could just do the right thing and
use that partition's ./etc/lilo.conf to properly fill in the blanks...
3. While KDE still reports version 3.1, it is gawd-awful slow to start.
Install itself:
1. Using hd.img, got tons of install errors while always in the
"Installing package xpp" step... smells like cd[23] images were not
used... Again, this is the non-glitzy stuff that makes or breaks a
review... why can't the hd.img install all I've asked for, especially
after spending MANY minutes going through all the packages, and never
being told that I was wasting my time, to then just have the install
miserably fall short...???
* getFile libmm1-1.3.0-3mdk.i586.rpm:Installation CD 2 (x86)
* refusing medium 2
Then lots of this type of stuff:
* rpm transactions start
* getFile apache-modules-1.3.27-11mdk.i586.rpm:Installation CD 2 (x86)
* refusing medium 2 <========= (3)(4)
* retrying installing package apache-modules-1.3.27-11mdk.i586 alone in a
transaction
* opened rpmdb for writing in /mnt
* opened rpm database for retry transaction of 1 package only
* check failed : mm = 1.3.0 is needed by apache-modules-1.3.27-11mdk
libmm.so.1 is needed by apache-modules-1.3.27-11mdk
(3) So if CD2 is refused, it's a tad irritating for the human to have to
click [OK] for each package on the refused medium...
(4) Ditto for CD3...
2. This install locked up while trying to finish/reboot -- complained it
could not umount partitions (nothing in logs); but the restart was clean
notwithstanding the above.
IMO, 9.2rc1 installer is still not past be^H^Halpha quality.
********************** More on lilo...
To understand what is wrong with the installer's view of lilo.conf, here
is my hand-crafted lilo.conf on the 9.1 side (/dev/hda1) -- the 9.2
version needs to take the opposing view of /dev/hda9 with hda1 as the
"foreign" OS using /91 as the mount point...
boot=/dev/hda
map=/boot/map
install=menu
vga=normal
default="linux"
keytable=/boot/us.klt
prompt
nowarn
timeout=50
message=/boot/message
menu-scheme=wb:bw:wb:bw
image=/boot/vmlinuz
label="linux"
root=/dev/hda1
initrd=/boot/initrd.img
append="devfs=mount acpi=off prof=Home"
read-only
image=/boot/vmlinuz
label="linux-acpi"
root=/dev/hda1
initrd=/boot/initrd.img
append="devfs=mount acpi=on prof=Home"
read-only
image=/boot/vmlinuz
label="failsafe"
root=/dev/hda1
initrd=/boot/initrd.img
append="failsafe devfs=nomount acpi=off"
read-only
other=/dev/fd0
label="floppy"
unsafe
image=/boot/vmlinuz
label="office"
root=/dev/hda1
initrd=/boot/initrd.img
append="devfs=mount acpi=off prof=Office"
read-only
# 9.2
image=/92/boot/vmlinuz
label="linux9.2"
root=/dev/hda9
initrd=/92/boot/initrd.img
append="devfs=mount acpi=off resume=/dev/hda7"
read-only
image=/92/boot/vmlinuz
label="failsafe9.2"
root=/dev/hda9
initrd=/92/boot/initrd.img
append="failsafe devfs=nomount acpi=off resume=/dev/hda7"
read-only
In other words, there is no way to correctly build lilo using a common
lilo.conf file; the "view" depends on which partition you're starting
from...
Of course, not enough of 9.2 was installed to really give it a serious
look...
On Wed, 3 Sep 2003 22:01:27 -0500 "David Rankin"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bottom line, forget focusing on just getting the next number release
> out
> to stay ahead in the numbers game, get the next release out right. I've
> said it before and I'll say it again, if 9.2 is as clean and reliable as
> 7.2 was/is, the mdk folks will have hit a home run.
Wholeheartedly agree -- however, for me, rc1 is not even making it to
_first base_ so far, which I define as a full (as-requested), and correct
*installation* without doing damage to existing installations. Second
base is a proper bootup, with all the correct settings. Third base, is
everything just working smooth as silk. The home run is simply all of the
above *together* -- you can't score a home run if you miss any base.
<soap>
The "first impression" is not what 9.2 will look like when running; it's
the *installation* process... All of the issues above are one-time
problems for the installer; but they are those that create that
all-important "first impression" -- why bother with 9.2 if the
_installation_ looks shoddy...?
</soap>
