Re: lilo about to be dropped?
Giacomo Catenazzi, le Wed 08 Apr 2009 19:47:55 +0200, a écrit : > Samuel Thibault wrote: > >> I installed grub (and Debian). Trying the Windows hidden partition > >> (to install windows), grub stopped working (it was rescue mode, but > >> without capability to rescue something). Also rescue disk + > >> reconfiguring + update-grub did nothing. > > > > Err, did you re-run install-grub? > > No ;-) only update-grub and > dpkg-reconfigure -plow grub-pc grub-common Then little wonder. update-grub only updates menu.lst. > I was expecting that reconfigure will do the right things, grub maintainers considered that it's a bad thing to automatically reinstall things in a MBR. You need to re-run grub-install to do that. Samuel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Processed: Re: Bug#523137: Package: Debian 5.0.0 Lenny Net Install
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > reassign 523137 installation-reports Bug#523137: Package: Debian 5.0.0 Lenny Net Install Warning: Unknown package 'debian' Warning: Unknown package '5.0.0' Warning: Unknown package 'lenny' Warning: Unknown package 'net' Warning: Unknown package 'install' Bug reassigned from package `debian 5.0.0 lenny net install' to `installation-reports'. > -- Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: D-I not using grub (was: lilo about to be dropped?)
On Wednesday 08 April 2009, Martin Wuertele wrote: > * Frans Pop [2009-04-07 21:37]: > > The syslog shows: > > Mar 6 17:19:36 grub-installer: /boot is a lvm volume > > (/dev/mapper/kronos0-root), cannot install grub > > > > Which is confirmed by the hardware summary, which does not show a > > separate /boot partition. > > If I use expert mode and create md0 for /boot there, does that > show up in the summary? That is unrelated to expert mode (partitioning is virtually identical for a default install and expert mode), but a separate /boot partition would definitely show up no matter what device it's on. > I remember that for whatever reason I did so... I think you may have been a victim of #391479. That BR means that if you assigned md0 for /boot before e.g. configuring LVM for md1, that assignment would be lost and you'd have to assign it again. A careful check of the partition overview before choosing the "finish partitioning" option is always highly recommended. So you may well have created md0, but /boot never got mounted on it and thus ended up in the LV with /, which resulted in lilo being used. That particular bug was fixed in partman-md (42) though, uploaded in August 2008, so well before the release of Lenny. Cheers, FJP -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: lilo about to be dropped?
On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 11:05:43AM -0500, William Pitcock wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-04-06 at 08:53 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 10:13:32AM -0500, William Pitcock wrote:
> > > I agree here too. I think these install paths could be replaced by
> > > ext2linux as well, if that is what is needed to be done.
> > And why in the world is it useful to transition these use cases to ext2linux
> > when we already have a lilo package that suits these needs perfectly well?
> Because it does not.
That's not for you to say. There are clearly a large number of users who
are using lilo (3388 who also enable popcon - and if they're running popcon,
I guess that means lilo is working for them what with that whole booting
thing). So lilo *is* meeting the needs of these users, notwithstanding your
dissatisfaction with the use case coverage.
> The LVM support in LILO is hideously broken, so these arguments do not
> really matter. It only works in certain conditions and is known to break
> horribly if you have say, a kernel spanning multiple PVs.
They matter to the users who are *using* lilo this way, whether or not you
happen to find the implementation to your liking.
I don't use lilo. I have gradually transitioned all my old installs over to
grub, delayed only by the need to accomodate the risks of downtime. That
doesn't mean I think it's acceptable to drop lilo on the floor for squeeze,
when it's still being offered as an installation option for *two* supported
Debian releases, in some cases by default, and there doesn't appear to be an
actual transition plan for those users who currently have lilo installed,
whether that's by necessity or choice.
> Only a true idiot boots off an LVM volume anyway, since there is risk of
> metadata corruption, etc.
Bullshit.
> But, you will. Infact, you told me yesterday on IRC that your intention
> is to "take over lilo maintenance to score points with DDs" and that you
> just "needed it for a few months". This isn't the right issue to "score
> points" on, as lack of proper maintenance is WORSE than not having it in
> Debian at all.
No - *bad* maintenance is worse than not having it in Debian at all. But
having the package in Debian on autopilot is *better* than leaving those
currently using it out in the cold, or giving them a poorly-implemented
transition.
Insisting that we drop lilo from the archive before any work has been done
to make a transition to grub{1,2} possible is putting the cart before the
horse.
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/
slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: please allow ltsp 5.1.69-1 into testing
Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > ltsp is blocked from migrating into testing, due to the ltsp-client-builder > udeb, though this udeb is not used by debian-installer by default, and has no > changes since the previous version. > > it has been in unstable for 6 days without introducing new problems, and > includes several updated translations. unblocked Cheers Luk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
please allow ltsp 5.1.69-1 into testing
ltsp is blocked from migrating into testing, due to the ltsp-client-builder udeb, though this udeb is not used by debian-installer by default, and has no changes since the previous version. it has been in unstable for 6 days without introducing new problems, and includes several updated translations. thanks! live well, vagrant -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: lilo about to be dropped?
On Wed, Apr 08, 2009 at 11:21:12AM -0500, William Pitcock wrote: > Does this mean that you will become lilo upstream as well? Are you > *qualified* to become lilo upstream? Do you know assembly language? > (tip: most of the important parts are assembly language.) > If not, then stop talking now. Anything less is unhealthy as it will > just become another XMMS with lots of patches ontop of it to fix bugs. No, it'll become another grub1 with lots of patches on top of it to fix bugs. Oh wait, it already is that. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: lilo about to be dropped?
Samuel Thibault wrote: >> I installed grub (and Debian). Trying the Windows hidden partition >> (to install windows), grub stopped working (it was rescue mode, but >> without capability to rescue something). Also rescue disk + >> reconfiguring + update-grub did nothing. > > Err, did you re-run install-grub? No ;-) only update-grub and dpkg-reconfigure -plow grub-pc grub-common I was expecting that reconfigure will do the right things, but on the other side, without a good rescue CD (64-bit), I just renounced after 2 tries, not to redo the long d-i rescue procedure ciao cate -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
debian-installer_20070308etch5_ia64.changes ACCEPTED
Mapping oldstable to oldstable-proposed-updates. Accepted: debian-installer-images_20070308etch5_ia64.tar.gz byhand debian-installer_20070308etch5_ia64.deb to pool/main/d/debian-installer/debian-installer_20070308etch5_ia64.deb Changes: debian-installer (20070308etch5) oldstable; urgency=low . * Rebuild to avoid .svn files in the tarball Override entries for your package: debian-installer_20070308etch5_ia64.deb - optional devel Thank you for your contribution to Debian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: D-I not using grub (was: lilo about to be dropped?)
Hi Frans! * Frans Pop [2009-04-07 21:37]: > On Tuesday 07 April 2009, Martin Wuertele wrote: > > Data from /var/log/installer is available at > > http://asteria.debian.or.at/~maxx/.var_log_installer.tar.gz > > The syslog shows: > Mar 6 17:19:36 grub-installer: /boot is a lvm volume > (/dev/mapper/kronos0-root), cannot install grub > > Which is confirmed by the hardware summary, which does not show a > separate /boot partition. If I use expert mode and create md0 for /boot there, does that show up in the summary? I remember that for whatever reason I did so... yours Martin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Processing of debian-installer_20070308etch5_ia64.changes
debian-installer_20070308etch5_ia64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: debian-installer_20070308etch5_ia64.deb debian-installer-images_20070308etch5_ia64.tar.gz Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: lilo about to be dropped?
> I installed grub (and Debian). Trying the Windows hidden partition > (to install windows), grub stopped working (it was rescue mode, but > without capability to rescue something). Also rescue disk + > reconfiguring + update-grub did nothing. Err, did you re-run install-grub? Samuel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: lilo about to be dropped?
On Wed, 2009-04-08 at 16:22 +0200, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote: > Nenolod: sorry for the other mail. > > William Pitcock wrote: > > On Tue, 2009-04-07 at 13:06 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: > >> On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 9:21 PM, William Pitcock > >> wrote: > >>> Lilo upstream is dead (no release in quite a while), but the lilo > >>> maintainer has also been seen as saying in various mailing lists etc, > >>> that since Debian patches lilo that he has no interest in helping to fix > >>> problems in our version. > >> Ok but you could try to push those patches upstream. This is how > >> grub has been improved and also parted. This works most of time. > >> > >> This way we "reduce" the amount of patches we keep in Debian > >> and also you could try to get in touch with other distros to share > >> the load and avoid reworking at same things. > > > > lilo is officially unmaintained now. The canonical website of lilo now > > points to a 404 error page, see http://lilo.go.dyndns.org/ . > > as grub was not really maintained. Also grub2 doesn't seems so fast in > development. > I think these kind of project have difficult to maintain motivated > maintainer. > > What do the other distributions? I've seen a few smaller distributions looking into extlinux as an alternative to lilo. Not sure what the redhat/fedora/centos/etc camp are doing though. > > extlinux seems the real alternative: the maintainer is active > in kernel boot since a lot of years, he has a good knowledge > of lilo (thus is not the usual: do a new project because I > cannot read/understand the old code). > > OTOH hpa test always the boot changes in kernel, and > lilo is always tested, so in this regards, he take also > care about lilo. > > > I think we need a discussion of the fate of lilo at DebConf. > I volunteer to check and give you technical details of the > main boot loaders for i386/amd64 architecture, so that > we can decide better (and give inputs to upstream on what > they miss). Any interest in such talk? It would be a good topic for discussion if I can make it to DebConf this year (which is probable, just a matter of getting a good deal on plane tickets). > > > BTW: my new laptop was saved by lilo ;-) One of my newer servers was also saved by lilo (fucking adaptec SAS controllers...). However, the current health of lilo is still something to be concerned about. > I installed grub (and Debian). Trying the Windows hidden partition > (to install windows), grub stopped working (it was rescue mode, but > without capability to rescue something). Also rescue disk + > reconfiguring + update-grub did nothing. > Installing lilo gave me a know boot environment, and it worked at > first try. So: lilo should live! That's because grub does a number of things incorrectly as well. I don't think extlinux repeats those mistakes though, at least from what I have seen in production. William signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: lilo about to be dropped?
On Wed, 2009-04-08 at 11:05 -0400, Matt Arnold wrote: > As the silent co-maintainer of lilo I believe I should now voice my > thoughts on this > > I too believe that lilo should belive that lilo should be remove *at > some point* but now is not the time. So I restate my willingness to > take over fully publicly. Upstream made a release of a bootloader in > 2007 a bootloader is quite different from an internet facing service > or a desktop app, so it is possible that upstream hasn't made a > release because they haven't felt a need to existed. From this thread > there still appears to be use cases for lilo and it seems to be > meeting the needs of the people that need it. Unless there is a > security hole or show stopping bug that makes the package totally > unusable why remove it. There will eventually be that case and when > such a time comes we will reexamine the issue but why fix what is > working for people. Again I will take over the package if you > (nenolod) don't want it anymore. I An RM seems overkill when a line in > the package description will do nicely > Does this mean that you will become lilo upstream as well? Are you *qualified* to become lilo upstream? Do you know assembly language? (tip: most of the important parts are assembly language.) If not, then stop talking now. Anything less is unhealthy as it will just become another XMMS with lots of patches ontop of it to fix bugs. William signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#503040: marked as done (debian-installer: Build firmware for the DNS-323)
Your message dated Wed, 08 Apr 2009 15:17:25 + with message-id and subject line Bug#503040: fixed in debian-installer 20090123lenny1 has caused the Debian Bug report #503040, regarding debian-installer: Build firmware for the DNS-323 to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 503040: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=503040 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: debian-installer Severity: normal Tags: patch The attached patch extends d-i firmware building for armel to build initrd and kernel uBoot files, and a complete firmware image, for the DNS-323 and CH3SNAS devices. The patch requires a new package dns323-firmware-tools, which is currently sitting in NEW. - Matt unchanged: --- b/installer/build/config/armel/orion5x/netboot.cfg +++ b/installer/build/config/armel/orion5x/netboot.cfg @@ -68,0 +69,11 @@ +# Dlink DNS-323 / Conceptronic CH3SNAS +dns323: + mkdir -p $(SOME_DEST)/$(EXTRANAME)/dlink/dns323 + mkdir -p $(TEMP)/dns323 + # Set machine id 1542 (0x0606) + devio > $(TEMP)/dns323/kernel 'wl 0xe3a01c06,4' 'wl 0xe3811006,4' + cat $(TEMP_KERNEL) >> $(TEMP)/dns323/kernel + mkimage -A arm -O linux -T kernel -C none -e 0x8000 -a 0x8000 -n "Debian kernel" -d $(TEMP)/dns323/kernel $(TEMP)/dns323/kernel.uboot + #util/pad $(TEMP)/dns323/kernel.uboot 2097152 # 2 MB + mkimage -A arm -O linux -T ramdisk -C gzip -e 0x0080 -a 0x0080 -n "netboot image" -d $(TEMP_INITRD) $(TEMP)/dns323/initrd.uboot + mkdns323fw -k $(TEMP)/dns323/kernel.uboot -i $(TEMP)/dns323/initrd.uboot -p 7 -c 1 -m 1 -o $(SOME_DEST)/$(EXTRANAME)/dlink/dns323/netboot.img unchanged: --- a/installer/debian/control +++ b/installer/debian/control @@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ Standards-Version: 3.6.2 Vcs-Svn: svn://svn.debian.org/d-i/trunk/installer Build-Conflicts: libnewt-pic [mipsel] # NOTE: Do not edit the next line by hand. See comment below. -Build-Depends: debhelper (>= 4), apt, apt-utils, gnupg, debian-archive-keyring (>= 2006.11.22), dpkg (>= 1.13.9), dctrl-tools, wget, bc, debiandoc-sgml, xsltproc, docbook-xsl, libbogl-dev [!kfreebsd-i386 !kfreebsd-amd64 !hurd-i386], glibc-pic, libslang2-pic (>= 2.0.6-4), libnewt-pic [!mipsel], libnewt-dev [mipsel], libgcc1 [i386 amd64], cramfsprogs [powerpc ppc64 ia64 mips mipsel arm armeb armel], genext2fs (>= 1.3-7.1), e2fsprogs, mklibs (>= 0.1.25), mklibs-copy [mips mipsel], genisoimage [!s390 !s390x], genromfs [sparc], hfsutils [powerpc ppc64], dosfstools [i386 ia64 m68k amd64], cpio, devio [arm armeb armel], slugimage (>= 0.10+r58-6) [arm armeb armel], nwutil [arm], uboot-mkimage [arm armel], syslinux (>= 2:3.63+dfsg-2) [i386 amd64], palo [hppa], elilo [ia64], yaboot [powerpc ppc64], aboot (>= 0.9b-2) [alpha], silo [sparc], sparc-utils [sparc], genisovh [mips], tip22 [mips], colo (>= 1.21-1) [mipsel], sibyl [mips mipsel], atari-bootstrap [m68k], vmelilo [m68k], m68k-vme-tftplilo [m68k], amiboot [m68k], emile [m68k], emile-bootblocks [m68k], apex-nslu2 [arm armeb armel], tofrodos [i386 amd64 kfreebsd-i386 kfreebsd-amd64], mtools (>= 3.9.9-1) [i386 ia64 m68k amd64 kfreebsd-i386 kfreebsd-amd64], module-init-tools [i386 arm armeb armel amd64 alpha hppa ia64 m68k mips mipsel powerpc ppc64 s390 sparc], bf-utf-source [!s390 !s390x], upx-ucl (>= 3) [i386], mkvmlinuz [powerpc ppc64], openssl [arm armel], win32-loader [i386 amd64 kfreebsd-i386 kfreebsd-amd64] +Build-Depends: debhelper (>= 4), apt, apt-utils, gnupg, debian-archive-keyring (>= 2006.11.22), dpkg (>= 1.13.9), dctrl-tools, wget, bc, debiandoc-sgml, xsltproc, docbook-xsl, libbogl-dev [!kfreebsd-i386 !kfreebsd-amd64 !hurd-i386], glibc-pic, libslang2-pic (>= 2.0.6-4), libnewt-pic (>= 0.52.2-11.3) [!mipsel], libnewt-dev (>= 0.52.2-11.3) [mipsel], libgcc1 [i386 amd64], cramfsprogs [powerpc ppc64 ia64 mips mipsel arm armeb armel], genext2fs (>= 1.3-7.1), e2fsprogs, mklibs (>= 0.1.25), mklibs-copy [mips mipsel], genisoimage [!s390 !s390x], genromfs [sparc], hfsutils [powerpc ppc64], dosfstools [i386 ia64 m68k amd64], cpio, devio [arm armeb armel], slugimage (>= 0.10+r58-6) [arm armeb armel], dns323-firmware-tools [armel], nwutil [arm], uboot-mkimage [arm armel], syslinux (>= 2:3.63+dfsg-2) [i386 amd64], palo [hppa], elilo [ia64], yaboot [powerpc ppc64], aboot (>= 0.9b-2) [alpha], silo [sparc], sparc-utils [sparc], genisovh [mips], tip22 [mips], colo (>= 1.21-1) [mipsel], sibyl [mips mipsel], atari-bootstrap [m68k], vmelilo [m68k], m68k-vme-tftplilo [m68k], amiboot [m68k], emile [m68k], emile-bootblocks [m68k], apex-nslu2 [arm armeb armel], tofrodos [i386 amd64 kfreebsd-i386 kfreebsd-amd64
Building an amd64 installer on an i386 machine
Hi, I'm trying to install Debian on an amd64 machine using a USB stick and the testing netinst from 8th April 2009. I want the 2.6.29-1 kernel (for the ath9k module). I got the built kernel package: linux-image-2.6.29-1-amd64_2.6.29-3~snapshot.13357_amd64.deb Trouble is, my current functioning computer is an i386 machine. So following the guide at http://wiki.debian.org/DebianInstaller/Modify/CustomKernel ...I get to the end of Step 1: "Once you have the kernel-image.deb, install it for the next step. You do not need to boot into the new kernel." But I can't, because as dpkg says: "package architecture (amd64) does not match system (i386)". Nuts. Can I build the amd64 installer from my i386 machine? (Alternatively, is there an easier way to make the ath9k module available to the current installer?) I would appreciate any help on this. Thanks, Jason -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
debian-installer_20090123lenny1_amd64.changes ACCEPTED
Mapping stable to proposed-updates. Accepted: debian-installer-images_20090123lenny1_amd64.tar.gz byhand debian-installer_20090123lenny1.dsc to pool/main/d/debian-installer/debian-installer_20090123lenny1.dsc debian-installer_20090123lenny1.tar.gz to pool/main/d/debian-installer/debian-installer_20090123lenny1.tar.gz debian-installer_20090123lenny1_amd64.deb to pool/main/d/debian-installer/debian-installer_20090123lenny1_amd64.deb Changes: debian-installer (20090123lenny1) stable; urgency=low . [ Martin Michlmayr ] * Include minix-modules on the orion5x image for the D-Link DNS-323, thanks Matt Palmer. * Generate images for the D-Link DNS-323 and Conceptronic CH3SNAS, thanks Matt Palmer. Closes: #503040. . [ Otavio Salvador ] * Bump kernel versions to 2.6.26-2. Override entries for your package: debian-installer_20090123lenny1.dsc - source devel debian-installer_20090123lenny1_amd64.deb - optional devel Announcing to debian-chan...@lists.debian.org Closing bugs: 503040 Thank you for your contribution to Debian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: lilo about to be dropped?
As the silent co-maintainer of lilo I believe I should now voice my thoughts on this I too believe that lilo should belive that lilo should be remove *at some point* but now is not the time. So I restate my willingness to take over fully publicly. Upstream made a release of a bootloader in 2007 a bootloader is quite different from an internet facing service or a desktop app, so it is possible that upstream hasn't made a release because they haven't felt a need to existed. From this thread there still appears to be use cases for lilo and it seems to be meeting the needs of the people that need it. Unless there is a security hole or show stopping bug that makes the package totally unusable why remove it. There will eventually be that case and when such a time comes we will reexamine the issue but why fix what is working for people. Again I will take over the package if you (nenolod) don't want it anymore. I An RM seems overkill when a line in the package description will do nicely On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 10:22 AM, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote: > Nenolod: sorry for the other mail. > > William Pitcock wrote: >> >> On Tue, 2009-04-07 at 13:06 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 9:21 PM, William Pitcock >>> wrote: Lilo upstream is dead (no release in quite a while), but the lilo maintainer has also been seen as saying in various mailing lists etc, that since Debian patches lilo that he has no interest in helping to fix problems in our version. >>> >>> Ok but you could try to push those patches upstream. This is how >>> grub has been improved and also parted. This works most of time. >>> >>> This way we "reduce" the amount of patches we keep in Debian >>> and also you could try to get in touch with other distros to share >>> the load and avoid reworking at same things. >> >> lilo is officially unmaintained now. The canonical website of lilo now >> points to a 404 error page, see http://lilo.go.dyndns.org/ . > > as grub was not really maintained. Also grub2 doesn't seems so fast in > development. > I think these kind of project have difficult to maintain motivated > maintainer. > > What do the other distributions? > > extlinux seems the real alternative: the maintainer is active > in kernel boot since a lot of years, he has a good knowledge > of lilo (thus is not the usual: do a new project because I > cannot read/understand the old code). > > OTOH hpa test always the boot changes in kernel, and > lilo is always tested, so in this regards, he take also > care about lilo. > > > I think we need a discussion of the fate of lilo at DebConf. > I volunteer to check and give you technical details of the > main boot loaders for i386/amd64 architecture, so that > we can decide better (and give inputs to upstream on what > they miss). Any interest in such talk? > > > BTW: my new laptop was saved by lilo ;-) > I installed grub (and Debian). Trying the Windows hidden partition > (to install windows), grub stopped working (it was rescue mode, but > without capability to rescue something). Also rescue disk + > reconfiguring + update-grub did nothing. > Installing lilo gave me a know boot environment, and it worked at > first try. So: lilo should live! > > ciao > cate > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact > listmas...@lists.debian.org > > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: lilo about to be dropped?
On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 10:22 PM, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote: > as grub was not really maintained. Also grub2 doesn't seems so fast in > development. > I think these kind of project have difficult to maintain motivated > maintainer. I would really love to own a computer that used coreboot, Linux and a userland bootloader like kboot/kexec-loader/runnix to boot. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#484421: Should support preseeding of LVM-over-RAID setups
Hi,
I've made some tests based on the patch proposed by Lunar. To fully
automate LVM over RAID setups, I've changed some parts of the
scripts :
1) Parted try to read a partition table on the RAID volume. I added a
commit.d script before parted to avoid that.
2) In the initial_auto_raid_lvm script, before starting
auto_lvm_perform, the vg map must be created with
auto_lvm_create_vg_map.
Here is a new patch proposal.
Cheers,
Philippe Le Brouster
diff -aburN -x .svn /home/plb/debian/sources/official/lenny/partman/partman-auto-raid-14/commit.d/auto_raid_parted_hack ./commit.d/auto_raid_parted_hack
--- /home/plb/debian/sources/official/lenny/partman/partman-auto-raid-14/commit.d/auto_raid_parted_hack 1970-01-01 01:00:00.0 +0100
+++ ./commit.d/auto_raid_parted_hack 2009-03-04 15:34:25.0 +0100
@@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
+#!/bin/sh
+
+. /lib/partman/lib/base.sh
+. /lib/partman/lib/commit.sh
+
+for dev in $DEVICES/\=dev\=md*; do
+[ -d "$dev" ] || continue
+cd $dev
+
+id=$(ls -d 0-*)
+fstype=""
+
+[ -f "$id/filesystem" ] && fstype=$(cat $id/filesystem)
+
+[ -z $fstype ] && continue
+case "$fstype" in
+swap)
+;;
+lvm)
+;;
+*)
+open_dialog DISK_UNCHANGED
+close_dialog
+;;
+
+esac
+done
+
diff -aburN -x .svn /home/plb/debian/sources/official/lenny/partman/partman-auto-raid-14/commit.d/_numbers ./commit.d/_numbers
--- /home/plb/debian/sources/official/lenny/partman/partman-auto-raid-14/commit.d/_numbers 1970-01-01 01:00:00.0 +0100
+++ ./commit.d/_numbers 2009-03-03 14:09:05.0 +0100
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+29 auto_raid_parted_hack
+
diff -aburN -x .svn /home/plb/debian/sources/official/lenny/partman/partman-auto-raid-14/debian/changelog ./debian/changelog
--- /home/plb/debian/sources/official/lenny/partman/partman-auto-raid-14/debian/changelog 2008-09-22 02:04:43.0 +0200
+++ ./debian/changelog 2009-03-10 14:08:14.0 +0100
@@ -1,3 +1,10 @@
+partman-auto-raid (14+slis4.1.3~2) UNRELEASED; urgency=low
+
+ * Add the ability to preseed LVM over RAID based on the patch in #484421.
+
+
+ -- Philippe Le Brouster Mon, 09 Mar 2009 12:02:44 +0100
+
partman-auto-raid (14) unstable; urgency=low
[ Updated translations ]
diff -aburN -x .svn /home/plb/debian/sources/official/lenny/partman/partman-auto-raid-14/debian/control ./debian/control
--- /home/plb/debian/sources/official/lenny/partman/partman-auto-raid-14/debian/control 2008-08-09 21:26:06.0 +0200
+++ ./debian/control 2009-02-23 17:03:09.0 +0100
@@ -9,5 +9,5 @@
Package: partman-auto-raid
XC-Package-Type: udeb
Architecture: all
-Depends: ${misc:Depends}, partman-base (>= 114), partman-basicfilesystems, partman-ext3, partman-auto (>= 58), partman-md
+Depends: ${misc:Depends}, partman-base (>= 114), partman-basicfilesystems, partman-ext3, partman-auto (>= 79), partman-md
Description: Allow preseeded RAID installs
diff -aburN -x .svn /home/plb/debian/sources/official/lenny/partman/partman-auto-raid-14/debian/rules ./debian/rules
--- /home/plb/debian/sources/official/lenny/partman/partman-auto-raid-14/debian/rules 2008-08-09 21:26:06.0 +0200
+++ ./debian/rules 2009-03-03 13:36:47.0 +0100
@@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
dh_clean -k
dh_install auto-raidcfg bin
debian/install-rc display.d
+ debian/install-rc commit.d
binary-arch: build install
dh_testdir
diff -aburN -x .svn /home/plb/debian/sources/official/lenny/partman/partman-auto-raid-14/display.d/initial_auto_raid_fs ./display.d/initial_auto_raid_fs
--- /home/plb/debian/sources/official/lenny/partman/partman-auto-raid-14/display.d/initial_auto_raid_fs 2008-08-09 21:26:07.0 +0200
+++ ./display.d/initial_auto_raid_fs 2009-03-04 17:19:16.0 +0100
@@ -29,16 +29,24 @@
fi
cd $id
- if [ "$fstype" = swap ]; then
+ case "$fstype" in
+ swap)
rm -f filesystem mountpoint use_filesystem options
echo swap >method
- else
+ ;;
+ lvm)
+ # Register this RAID as a PV for initial_auto_raid_lvm
+ echo lvm >method
+ echo "/dev/md$raidnum" >>/var/lib/partman/initial_auto_raid_pvs
+ ;;
+ *)
echo "$fstype" >filesystem
echo "$mountpoint" >mountpoint
echo format >method
touch use_filesystem
mkdir options
- fi
+ ;;
+ esac
touch format
touch formatable
@@ -50,6 +58,7 @@
exit 0
fi
rm /var/lib/partman/do_initial_auto_raid_fs
+rm -f /var/lib/partman/initial_auto_raid_pvs
# Check we have the stashed value of the first RAID dev we created
db_get partman-auto-raid/raidnum
diff -aburN -x .svn /home/plb/debian/sources/official/lenny/partman/partman-auto-raid-14/display.d/initial_auto_raid_lvm ./display.d/initial_auto_raid_lvm
--- /home/plb/debian/sources/official/lenny/partman/partman-auto-raid-14/display.d/initial_auto_raid_lvm 1970-01-01 01:00:00.0 +0100
+++ ./display.d/initial_auto_raid_lvm 2009-03-04 16:55:54.0 +0100
@@ -0,0 +1,58 @@
+#!/bin/sh
+
+#set -x
+
+# Apply LVM partition
Re: lilo about to be dropped?
Nenolod: sorry for the other mail. William Pitcock wrote: On Tue, 2009-04-07 at 13:06 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 9:21 PM, William Pitcock wrote: Lilo upstream is dead (no release in quite a while), but the lilo maintainer has also been seen as saying in various mailing lists etc, that since Debian patches lilo that he has no interest in helping to fix problems in our version. Ok but you could try to push those patches upstream. This is how grub has been improved and also parted. This works most of time. This way we "reduce" the amount of patches we keep in Debian and also you could try to get in touch with other distros to share the load and avoid reworking at same things. lilo is officially unmaintained now. The canonical website of lilo now points to a 404 error page, see http://lilo.go.dyndns.org/ . as grub was not really maintained. Also grub2 doesn't seems so fast in development. I think these kind of project have difficult to maintain motivated maintainer. What do the other distributions? extlinux seems the real alternative: the maintainer is active in kernel boot since a lot of years, he has a good knowledge of lilo (thus is not the usual: do a new project because I cannot read/understand the old code). OTOH hpa test always the boot changes in kernel, and lilo is always tested, so in this regards, he take also care about lilo. I think we need a discussion of the fate of lilo at DebConf. I volunteer to check and give you technical details of the main boot loaders for i386/amd64 architecture, so that we can decide better (and give inputs to upstream on what they miss). Any interest in such talk? BTW: my new laptop was saved by lilo ;-) I installed grub (and Debian). Trying the Windows hidden partition (to install windows), grub stopped working (it was rescue mode, but without capability to rescue something). Also rescue disk + reconfiguring + update-grub did nothing. Installing lilo gave me a know boot environment, and it worked at first try. So: lilo should live! ciao cate -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Processing of debian-installer_20090123lenny1_amd64.changes
debian-installer_20090123lenny1_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: debian-installer_20090123lenny1.dsc debian-installer_20090123lenny1.tar.gz debian-installer_20090123lenny1_amd64.deb debian-installer-images_20090123lenny1_amd64.tar.gz Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Processing of debian-installer_20090123lenny1_amd64.changes
debian-installer_20090123lenny1_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to ftp.upload.debian.org along with the files: debian-installer_20090123lenny1.dsc debian-installer_20090123lenny1.tar.gz debian-installer_20090123lenny1_amd64.deb debian-installer-images_20090123lenny1_amd64.tar.gz Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Reminder: D-I team meeting April 11th 20:00
To all D-I team members (which means anybody who listens to -boot and cares enough about D-I), please remember that we planned a team meeting on April 11th at 20:00 UTC. Proposed topics: - finish going through the release goals list (followup for March 30th meeting) - status of development and early plans for a release? - work methods improvement: proposal for regular short team meetings (the last two topics come out of my mind, please feel free to amend/comment) -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Last call for review: Complete draft of the March 16th and 30th meetings minutes
Quoting Christian Perrier (bubu...@debian.org): > > FOlks, here is the complete draft of a report of our important > meetings, which I intend to send as a "Bits from the D-I team" mail in > a few days. This is your last chance to amend that text. I plan sending it either today (Apr 8th) evening (around 18:00UTC) or tomorrow morning. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#519508: installation-guide: Section 5.1.3 Booting from Linux Using LILO or GRUB assumes Linux is on hd0, 0
On Monday 06 April 2009, Filipus Klutiero wrote: > I see the path suggested in 4.4, but nothing about the partition. OK. I've committed an additional change to cover that. Cheers, FJP -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
