Bug#1080497: FSF Address Change
Package: lintian Version: 2.118.1 Severity: normal The FSF address has changed again, with the closure of the Boston office and going remote so W: old-fsf-address-in-copyright-file should be triggered by the 51 Franklin St address. https://www.fsf.org/blogs/cmmunity/fsf-office-closing-party The current mailing address can be found at https://www.fsf.org/about/contact/mailing but I understand it to be only a postal mail box. According to https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-howto.html, they have recommended using the URL https://www.gnu.org/licenses/ instead of a physical address for at least several years now. pgpFOfk1noju9.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#963750: RM: chef -- ROM; trademark issues
On Mon, 13 Jul 2020 16:49:25 -0700 Sean Whitton wrote: > DFSG#4 probably covers this case. ...if it were moved into non-free, since "Chef" currently fails DFSG #1, but even that's not an option if Debian can't distribute "Chef" in the first place, lest the project run afoul of the trademark policy. Adopting Cinc as a rebranded version of Chef would sidestep the entire matter: https://cinc.sh/ pgpYPkPdWTnJb.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#963750: RM: chef -- ROM; trademark issues
Sean Whitton asked: > On the other hand you say you think that we should remove the Chef > package because there are not going to be future upstream releases > which are free software. Could you provide me a reference, please? The problematic pieces appear to be contained within [0]. These two points appear to eliminate freedom #2 [1] by making exact copies impossible. "You may redistribute the applicable Chef open source software under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license, but you may not use the Chef Marks in doing so without express written permission from Chef or as expressly permitted in this Policy." "We consider your compilation of our open source code into a distribution for use in your business to be your distribution, not Chef's distribution. Therefore, the resulting distribution must have enough of the Chef Marks removed from the source code so as to not confuse users as to the origin of the distribution." [0] https://www.chef.io/trademark-policy/ [1] https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/ pgpdaPWYdPjYd.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#931564: Kernel Won't Load Firmware?
Package: linux Version: 4.19.37-5 The version: Debian 10 Buster The hardware: 01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. [AMD/ATI] RV610/M74 [Mobility Radeon HD 2400 XT] On boot I see this message. In past Debian versions I can either install firmware-amd-graphics to silence the message or ignore it; either way the display would work fine. Jul 7 08:11:45 localhost kernel: [2.232573] [drm] radeon kernel modesetting enabled. Jul 7 08:11:45 localhost kernel: [2.232719] [drm:radeon_pci_probe [radeon]] *ERROR* radeon kernel modesetting for R600 or later requires firmware installed Jul 7 08:11:45 localhost kernel: [2.232786] See https://wiki.debia n.org/Firmware for information about missing firmware With Buster things seem to fall over and die: Jul 7 08:11:46 localhost systemd[1]: Starting GNOME Display Manager... Jul 7 08:11:47 localhost systemd[1]: Started GNOME Display Manager. Jul 7 08:11:50 localhost systemd[1]: Started Session c1 of user Debian-gdm. Jul 7 08:11:54 localhost gnome-shell[571]: Failed to create backend: Could not find a primary drm kms device Jul 7 08:11:54 localhost gnome-session[562]: gnome-session- binary[562]: WARNING: App 'org.gnome.Shell.desktop' exited with code 1 Jul 7 08:11:54 localhost gnome-session-binary[562]: Unrecoverable failure in required component org.gnome.Shell.desktop Jul 7 08:11:54 localhost gnome-session-binary[562]: WARNING: App 'org.gnome.Shell.desktop' exited with code 1 I decide to try to see if the firmware makes a difference. I enable nonfree, install firmware-amd-graphics, and reboot but nothing has changed. The exact same messages as above still appears; below. It's almost like the kernel still couldn't find it, even after it had been installed. I compiled a kernel from upstream which was able to load the firmware and get a graphical interface. Since replacing the kernel solved it I'm reporting this against the kernel. Jul 7 08:30:10 localhost kernel: [2.198524] [drm] radeon kernel modesetting enabled. Jul 7 08:30:10 localhost kernel: [2.198675] [drm:radeon_pci_probe [radeon]] *ERROR* radeon kernel modesetting for R600 or later requires firmware installed Jul 7 08:30:10 localhost kernel: [2.198745] See https://wiki.debia n.org/Firmware for information about missing firmware Jul 7 08:30:12 localhost systemd[1]: Starting GNOME Display Manager... Jul 7 08:30:13 localhost systemd[1]: Started GNOME Display Manager. Jul 7 08:30:16 localhost systemd[1]: Started Session c1 of user Debian-gdm. Jul 7 08:30:19 localhost gnome-shell[581]: Failed to create backend: Could not find a primary drm kms device Jul 7 08:30:20 localhost gnome-session[573]: gnome-session- binary[573]: WARNING: App 'org.gnome.Shell.desktop' exited with code 1 Jul 7 08:30:20 localhost gnome-session-binary[573]: Unrecoverable failure in required component org.gnome.Shell.desktop Jul 7 08:30:20 localhost gnome-session-binary[573]: WARNING: App 'org.gnome.Shell.desktop' exited with code 1
Bug#895435: Unclear License
Package: as31 Version: 2.3.1-6+b2 The copyright file mentions only that as31 is "provided under the BSD license." Which one?
Bug#887320: A Workaround
gcc -O2 crashes but -O0 and -O1 don't. The assembler probably has old, fragile code that relies on assumptions that no longer hold (or that never held.)
Bug#890601: firmware-free: Source Package Doesn't Contain Source
Jonathan Nieder wrote .. > Can you be more specific? Which file have you found in the source > package that does not have corresponding source included? OK; perhaps this bug needs re-titling. There seems to be "a" source present, but the programs don't appear to be built from it. What started this is that I tried to build the usbdux firmware from source and found that the assembler needed to build the firmware segfaulted when trying to do so. Curious as to how Debian got the firmware to build I checked out the firmware-free package. The answer seems to be: They didn't; they just use the binaries from linux- firmware.git. (The sha512 hashes appear to be identical.) If they were built from source then the build dependencies for firmware- free would be bigger (such as, among others, depending on as31 in order to build the usbdux firmware) and the breakage of tools needed to build the firmware would have been noticed. Surely including auto-generated files and/or just re-cycling upstream's binaries in a source package either is or should be some sort of policy violation? Building from source would help to ensure that the provided source is complete, corresponding, and buildable. It would also be consistent with the proposed stuff for JavaScript to exclude auto- generated files from source.
Bug#890601: Source Package Doesn't Contain Source
Package: firmware-linux-free Version: 3.4 It appears that the source package for firmware-linux-free contains the firmware binaries downloaded from linux-firmware.git. Shouldn't a source package contain, you know, the source code? Especially as some of the firmwares are GPL-licensed, and Debian is shipping only the binaries. In looking into other distros it seems that that most don't compile the firmware from source either. As a result people don't notice when the tools to do so break. For example: The as31 assembler needed to build the usbdux firmware currently segfaults. Reference bug #887320.
Bug#887320: Segmentation fault
Package: as31 Version: 2.3.1-6+b2 The as31 assembler has a segmentation fault when building the usbdux firmware from linux-firmware.git. Steps to reproduce on a fresh install of Debian 9.3 Stretch: sudo apt install git make as31 git clone git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/firmware/linux-firmware.git cd linux-firmware/usbdux/ make -f Makefile_dux What I get: as31 -Fbin usbduxfast_firmware.asm including file: fx2-include.asm Makefile_dux:9: recipe for target 'usbduxfast_firmware.bin' failed make: *** [usbduxfast_firmware.bin] Segmentation fault Expected output after doing make -f Makefile_dux: as31 -Fbin usbduxfast_firmware.asm including file: fx2-include.asm Begin Pass #1 Begin Pass #2 as31 -Fbin usbdux_firmware.asm including file: fx2-include.asm Begin Pass #1 Begin Pass #2 as31 -Fbin usbduxsigma_firmware.asm including file: fx2-include.asm Begin Pass #1 Begin Pass #2 The successful build is the result of doing the build with Ubuntu 17.10 (Artful Aardvark) with these same steps. I tried looking for a source code difference between the Debian & Ubuntu packages but they seem the same and when I build Ubunut's package from source it also segfaults although their pre-compiled one does not. This makes me wonder if their pre-compiled binary was made using a different version of the source code that doesn't have this problem.
Bug#868345: Progress should be shown when using apt-transport-https
Package: apt-transport-https Version: 1.0.1 Severity: minor I've noticed that visible download progress is not shown in apt (sudo apt full-upgrade for example) when using a repository over HTTPS (after installing apt-transport-https.) The download is successful but the indicator remains at 0% (or at whatever percent it was when it started downloading from the HTTPS repo, in cases where the upgrade process had first downloaded packages from other repos before moving on to the HTTPS one.) The usual things like rate of speed and time remaining do not get displayed, resulting in the appearance that it's hung. Examining activity does show it's indeed downloading though, just not displaying anything. To reproduce it: Install apt-transport-https. Configure the package manager to use a repo over HTTPS. Install a package. Watch as no progress is shown but it is downloaded successfully and the normal installation process happens. Later, remove the package & do apt-get clean so that .deb so that it has to be downloaded again. Edit sources.list and replace https with http and install the package again. Notice that things like rate of speed and time remaining are displayed, while they were not previously. The only difference being the use of http vs https.
Bug#858963: Please Support Embedded WebVTT Subtitles
Package: vlc Version: 2.2.4-1~deb8u1 Severity: wishlist I understand that WebVTT has been adopted as the official subtitle format for WebM videos (FFmpeg also enforces this policy by not allowing other subtitle formats like SRT into a WebM file.) I have a WebM file with such subtitles embedded in them, as reported by FFmpeg: Duration: 00:01:35.98, start: 0.007000, bitrate: 458 kb/s Stream #0:0: Video: vp9, yuv420p, 720x540, SAR 1:1 DAR 4:3, 23.98fps, 23.98 tbr, 1k tbn, 1k tbc Stream #0:1(eng): Audio: opus, 48000 Hz, stereo, fltp (default) Stream #0:2(eng): Subtitle: webvtt In selecting the track from the Subtitle menu it appears that VLC does not support embedded WebVTT. The code where it was added seems more for external subtitle files. I've made a feature request to add that support, which has been added for the upcoming VLC 3.0: http://git.videolan.org/?p=vlc.git;a=commitdiff;h=5ef7a61e949c2dbfd4f149a7d108a6aea05ac3e4 This change cleanly applies to the VLC 2.2 series in Debian (I've done this already on my machine and it works.) It would be nice if this change could be made for the VLC in Debian so that others can easily have access to files with these subtitles in advance of VLC 3.0.
Bug#855975: reprepro should generate SHA512 fields
Package: reprepro Version: 4.13.1-1build1 Severity: wishlist It appears that sha512 is allowed in a repository: https://wiki.debian.org/RepositoryFormat reprepro should support this and generate appropriate sha512 fields.
Bug#709656: zoo: DFSG Violation => zoo was released in PD 2004
Jari Aalto said: > I hope the above covers the issues that were raised as I'm inclined to > close this bug. Sure.
Bug#709656: zoo: DFSG Violation => zoo was released in PD 2004
My analysis indicates that 28 files currently indicate they're in the public domain while an additional 50 contain no license information at all, creating the impression that they're still covered by that Copyright file in the root directory. If the information that you've provided is true, the bug title should probbaly be changed. How will someone reviewing the copyright and licensing information know that the developer has abandoned their copyright and that what they're seeing in that Copyright file in the tarball doesn't actually apply? Shouldn't the copyright and licensing information in the tarball be updated so as to avoid confusion in the future?
Bug#709656: DFSG Violation
Package: zoo Version: 2.10 In reviewing the file zoo.c I see "noncommercial use permitted." Can we take this to mean they're not allowing commercial use? I believe not allowing commercial use would be in violation of section 1 of the DFSG in which "the license of a Debian component may not restrict any party from selling or giving away the software." In reviewing the Copyright file I see that modified versions are permitted but not anything that "violates the compatibility goals." I believe this to be a violation of section 3 of the DFSG which state that I should be able to modify the software. Section of the DFSG should be read that people must have the ability to make an incompatible fork of the software, or doesn't have the same goals as the original developer. Otherwise the ability to modify software would be severely hindered.
Bug#709520: Package z88dk has non-free files
Package: z88dk Version: 1.8.ds1 While reviewing the z88dk package I noticed these various files indicate a non-commercial restriction. I believe this is in violation of section 1 of the Debian Free Software Guidelines (DFSG) which indicate that the license of a Debian component may not restrict any party from selling or giving away the software. libsrc/oz/ozinterrupt/ozcustomisr.asm test/machine/Z80/CodesCB.h test/machine/Z80/CodesED.h test/machine/Z80/Codes.h test/machine/Z80/CodesXCB.h test/machine/Z80/CodesXX.h test/machine/Z80/ConDebug.c test/machine/Z80/Debug.c test/machine/Z80/Tables.h test/machine/Z80/Z80.c test/machine/Z80/Z80.h
Bug#645825: Possible DFSG Violation In Bogofilter
Package: bogofilter Version: 1.2.2-2 Bogofilter include some documenttation under a license that doesn't permit modification or commercial use. Specifically, the files say: This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs German License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/de/ or send a letter to Creative Commons; 559 Nathan Abbott Way; Stanford, California 94305; USA. The files in question are in the /doc directory and are: bogofilter-SA-2005-01 bogofilter-SA-2005-02 bogofilter-SA-2010-01 This also appear to impact version 1.1.7. Other versions may be as well. If commercial use and modification are not permitted, is it a violation of the DFSG? signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#645807: DFSG Violation In BEAV
Package: beav Version: 1.40-18 In the file beav140.txt I found a note that "BEAV source and executable can be freely distributed for non-commercial purposes." Interpreted strictly, that also be read as not allowing modification. I believe that the non-commercial restriction and also not allowing modification to be a violation of the DFSG. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#544713: Patch
This is a known issue. A patch has been available since May 2009 at [1]. The Debian maintainer should consider applying this patch when building. [1] http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/theora/2009-May/002151.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#505739: Status?
Just inquiring on the status of this? I'd love to use ffmpeg2dirac but can't get it to compile on Lenny, so a pre-packaged version seems to be exactly what I need. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#389255: xserver-xfree86: Graphical session does not start.
On 1/17/07, Brice Goglin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Jason, Did you manage to get X back to work since you reported this bug 4 month ago? You could eventually try Xorg 7.1 currently in testing. But it is strange that this machine breaks with sarge r3 while it worked with r2. No. I never heard anything, so I gave up. I'm waiting for Etch. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#389255: Downgrade
Uses ATI RAGE 128 VR chip set and 2X AGP, 8 MB SGRAM. Has VGA port for external monitor, which can only display same resolutions as internal monitor. Supports resolutions of 640 x 480, 800 x 600, and 1024 x 768. On 9/24/06, Filipus Klutiero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: What video card does this use? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#389255: xserver-xfree86: Graphical session does not start.
Package: xserver-xfree86 Version: 4.3.0.dfsg.1-14sarge1 Severity: critical *** Please type your report below this line *** Install done on iMac DV (Slot Loading) Specs here: http://support.apple.com/specs/imac/iMac_Slot_Loading.html IIRC, this worked with Debain 3.1r2. I'm using the 3.1r3 NetInstall now. After performing initial install, the following message appears: "I cannot start the X server (your graphical interface.) It is likely that it is not setup correctly. Would you like to view the X server output to diagnose the problem?" Selecting yes provides the following.. -- Package-specific info: Contents of /var/lib/xfree86/X.roster: xserver-xfree86 /etc/X11/X target unchanged from checksum in /var/lib/xfree86/X.md5sum. X server symlink status: lrwxr-xr-x 1 root root 20 2006-09-24 11:14 /etc/X11/X -> /usr/bin/X11/XFree86 -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1901172 2005-09-08 05:59 /usr/bin/X11/XFree86 Contents of /var/lib/xfree86/XF86Config-4.roster: xserver-xfree86 VGA-compatible devices on PCI bus: /etc/X11/XF86Config-4 unchanged from checksum in /var/lib/xfree86/XF86Config-4.md5sum. XFree86 X server configuration file status: -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2910 2006-09-24 11:14 /etc/X11/XF86Config-4 Contents of /etc/X11/XF86Config-4: # XF86Config-4 (XFree86 X Window System server configuration file) # # This file was generated by dexconf, the Debian X Configuration tool, using # values from the debconf database. # # Edit this file with caution, and see the XF86Config-4 manual page. # (Type "man XF86Config-4" at the shell prompt.) # # This file is automatically updated on xserver-xfree86 package upgrades *only* # if it has not been modified since the last upgrade of the xserver-xfree86 # package. # # If you have edited this file but would like it to be automatically updated # again, run the following commands as root: # # cp /etc/X11/XF86Config-4 /etc/X11/XF86Config-4.custom # md5sum /etc/X11/XF86Config-4 >/var/lib/xfree86/XF86Config-4.md5sum # dpkg-reconfigure xserver-xfree86 Section "Files" FontPath"unix/:7100" # local font server # if the local font server has problems, we can fall back on these FontPath"/usr/lib/X11/fonts/misc" FontPath"/usr/lib/X11/fonts/cyrillic" FontPath"/usr/lib/X11/fonts/100dpi/:unscaled" FontPath"/usr/lib/X11/fonts/75dpi/:unscaled" FontPath"/usr/lib/X11/fonts/Type1" FontPath"/usr/lib/X11/fonts/CID" FontPath"/usr/lib/X11/fonts/Speedo" FontPath"/usr/lib/X11/fonts/100dpi" FontPath"/usr/lib/X11/fonts/75dpi" EndSection Section "Module" Load"GLcore" Load"bitmap" Load"dbe" Load"ddc" Load"dri" Load"extmod" Load"freetype" Load"glx" Load"int10" Load"record" Load"speedo" Load"type1" Load"vbe" EndSection Section "InputDevice" Identifier "Generic Keyboard" Driver "keyboard" Option "CoreKeyboard" Option "XkbRules""xfree86" Option "XkbModel""macintosh" Option "XkbLayout" "us" EndSection Section "InputDevice" Identifier "Configured Mouse" Driver "mouse" Option "CorePointer" Option "Device" "/dev/input/mice" Option "Protocol""ImPS/2" Option "Emulate3Buttons" "true" Option "ZAxisMapping""4 5" EndSection Section "Device" Identifier "Generic Video Card" Driver "ati" Option "UseFBDev""true" EndSection Section "Monitor" Identifier "Generic Monitor" HorizSync 60-60 VertRefresh 43-117 Option "DPMS" EndSection Section "Screen" Identifier "Default Screen" Device "Generic Video Card" Monitor "Generic Monitor" DefaultDepth24 SubSection "Display" Depth 1 Modes "800x600" "640x480" EndSubSection SubSection "Display" Depth 4 Modes "800x600" "640x480" EndSubSection SubSection "Display" Depth 8 Modes "800x600" "640x480" EndSubSection SubSection "Display" Depth 15 Modes "800x600" "640x480" EndSubSection SubSection "Display" Depth 16 Modes "800x600" "640x480" EndSubSection SubSection "Display" Depth 24 Modes "800x600" "640x480" E
Bug#381693: Installer Fails To Create LVM Partitions
Package: install Version: Beta 2 Severity: serious Downloaded beta 2 of Debian installer (http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-installer/) and, after getting to the part where I partition the drive I select: Erase entire disk and use LVM: IDE1 master (hda) - 120.0GB I then get an error saying the installer can't do it because there's already LVM partitions on the drive. And I'm thinking: Who cares? I selected "erase entire disk", so the installer should be happily steamrolling over any past partitions and data that exist on the drive. I also verified that this condition still exists in the latest daily build of the businesscard CD image. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#377948: ITP: webmin -- web-based administration toolkit
Bart Martens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: the webmin package was in debian before but was removed Your point? Jamie wants to take it over and reintroduce it. He's the upstream author to boot, so it seems like a great idea for him to also manage the Debian package. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#377948: TAG: Webmin -- A web-based administration interface for Unix systems.
On Wed, 12 Jul 2006 at 11:15:36 -0700, Jamie Cameron wrote: is there any documentation on the formats for these files? Check out http://www.debian.org/doc/maint-guide/ in general, and http://www.debian.org/doc/maint-guide/ch-dreq.en.html in specific. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#372698: Can't eject DVD with base-config
Package: base-config Version: 2.53.10 Severity: minor I start by downloading ISOs through BitTorrent containing Debian GNU/Linux "Sarge" 3.1r2 on DVD. I download both DVD #1 and DVD #2 and burn them onto new DVD-Rs. I take those DVDs to a different computer. Specifically, a slot-loading iMac G3 (http://support.apple.com/specs/imac/iMac_Slot_Loading.html). The machine contains 768MB of RAM and a 120GB hard drive. No other operating system will exist on the machine. I turn the computer on and insert the first DVD. It boots and I am in debian-installer. I go through the process of selecting a language, performing hardware configuration, and installing the base system. Everything performs as it should and debian-installer then states it's time to restart into my new Debian system. So, debian-installer ejects the first DVD I inserted and the computer reboots into base-config. I begin the process of using base-config. The hardware clock is set to GMT. The time zone is set to Pacific. The root password is set. A new user is created. It then prompts me for where I want to get the rest of Debian from. I set the archive access method for apt to "CD-ROM" so that I can use my newly burned DVDs. I insert DVD #1 and debian-installer leaves the previously blue background for an all-black one saying: Scanning CD, this will take a minute... After completion, it states: If you have another Debian CD (for example, the second CD in a two CD set), you should insert it now. Scan another CD? (Yes/No) Since I have the second DVD, I'd like that to be scanned as well. However: I can't complete base-config beyond this point, and that's where this bug report comes in: Most (but not all) "New World" Apple hardware does not have a manual eject button on the CD/DVD drive. When the hardware was designed, Apple intended the drives to be used exclusively with the software-based eject method (such as the "eject" command from the command line) so (while in base-config) there's no way to remove the DVD I previously inserted and have it scan the DVD. base-config only provides a "yes/no" option in the "Scan another CD?" dialog box and there's no method of ejecting the DVD. If I select "yes" in the "Scan another CD?" dialog box, the software simply re-scans the same DVD that's still there (apparently not realizing it's the same DVD it just scanned.) The obvious work around for me is to set the method to "HTTP" instead of "CD-ROM" while in the "Scan another CD?" dialog box, but not being able to scan all of the DVDs does make base-config somewhat unusable because I can't complete a CD or DVD-based installation. I have several different suggestions on how to modify base-config to work around the hardware design of Apple's machines: 1. Once base-config has finished scanning the DVD, automatically eject it before displaying the "Scan another CD?" dialog box. (This is similar to how the DVD is ejected after base-installer has finished but before the first reboot when base-config takes over.) 2. Don't automatically eject the DVD after scanning, but do eject it automatically if "yes" is selected in the "scan another CD?" dialog box (indicating there's another disk to scan.) This is similar to how the DVD is ejected after base-installer has run but before the first reboot when base-config takes over. 3. Add a third option in the "Scan another CD?" dialog box to eject the DVD. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#371149: Installation Report
Package: installation-reports Boot method: CD Image version: Debian.org BitTorrent Date: June 7, 2006 Machine: iMac (Slot Loading) Processor: 400MHz PowerPC G3 Memory: 768MB Partitions: FilesystemType 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on /dev/hda3 ext3 91511 55082 31547 64% / tmpfstmpfs 257688 0257688 0% /dev/shm /dev/hda5 ext396122052 32872 91206368 1% /home /dev/hda7 ext3 1830418 8240 1724522 1% /tmp /dev/hda6 ext3 1830418143608 1589154 9% /usr /dev/hda8 ext313392628100944 12611360 1% /var Output of lspci and lspci -n: lspci says: :00:0b.0 Host bridge: Apple Computer Inc. UniNorth AGP :00:10.0 Display controller: ATI Technologies Inc Rage 128 RL/VR AGP 0001:10:0b.0 Host bridge: Apple Computer Inc. UniNorth PCI 0001:10:12.0 FireWire (IEEE 1394): Texas Instruments TSB12LV23 IEEE-1394 Controller 0001:10:17.0 ff00: Apple Computer Inc. KeyLargo Mac I/O (rev 02) 0001:10:18.0 USB Controller: Apple Computer Inc. KeyLargo USB 0001:10:19.0 USB Controller: Apple Computer Inc. KeyLargo USB 0002:20:0b.0 Host bridge: Apple Computer Inc. UniNorth Internal PCI 0002:20:0f.0 Ethernet controller: Apple Computer Inc. UniNorth GMAC (Sun GEM) lspci -n says: :00:0b.0 0600: 106b:0020 :00:10.0 0380: 1002:524c 0001:10:0b.0 0600: 106b:001f 0001:10:12.0 0c00: 104c:8019 0001:10:17.0 ff00: 106b:0022 (rev 02) 0001:10:18.0 0c03: 106b:0019 0001:10:19.0 0c03: 106b:0019 0002:20:0b.0 0600: 106b:001e 0002:20:0f.0 0200: 106b:0021 Base System Installation Checklist: [O] = OK, [E] = Error (please elaborate below), [ ] = didn't try it Initial boot worked:[O ] Configure network HW: [O ] Config network: [O ] Detect CD: [ O] Load installer modules: [O ] Detect hard drives: [O ] Partition hard drives: [O ] Create file systems:[O ] Mount partitions: [O ] Install base system:[ O] Install boot loader:[O ] Reboot: [ O] Comments/Problems: The process seemed to be very straightforward. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]