Re: Install Report (b-f 2.3.6 i386; floppy/net; standard)

2001-06-25 Thread Anthony Towns
Package: debootstrap On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 01:32:43PM -0600, Matt Kraai wrote: When I tried building 0.1.12 locally (using fakeroot), /dev and the symlinks in devices.tar.gz had the correct groups. I also checked 0.1.13, and it appears to have the correct group information. Weird. I'll

Re: Install Report, powerpc oldworld 2.3.6 dtd 6/21 06:11 (woody)

2001-06-25 Thread Chris Tillman
On Sun, Jun 24, 2001 at 03:21:20PM -0700, Chris Tillman wrote: I noticed, this has probably always been a feature, that if you're heavy handed with the enter key, it's easy to skip steps, or rather, have them performed as default. For example, if you don't have a CD-ROM installed, try

Re: Install Report, powerpc oldworld 2.3.6 dtd 6/21 06:11 (woody)

2001-06-25 Thread Daniel Jacobowitz
On Sun, Jun 24, 2001 at 10:35:04PM -0800, Ethan Benson wrote: On Sun, Jun 24, 2001 at 03:21:20PM -0700, Chris Tillman wrote: These are some notes as I attempted to install the woody b-f. After selecting Partition a Hard Disk, an alert advised about there being no need for a boot

Re: Install Report (b-f 2.3.6 i386; floppy/net; standard)

2001-06-24 Thread Joey Hess
Anthony Towns wrote: (-testing cc dropped) On Sun, Jun 24, 2001 at 03:57:45PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: and setting my proxy worked pretty well. There are a few things that are standard that probably shouldn't be: gcc-3.0, nfs-kernel-server, xlib6g, the debconf/stool stuff, vacation

Install Report, powerpc oldworld 2.3.6 dtd 6/21 06:11 (woody)

2001-06-24 Thread Chris Tillman
These are some notes as I attempted to install the woody b-f. After selecting Partition a Hard Disk, an alert advised about there being no need for a boot partition and ... and the root partition must be on the first disk. I have had Debian installed on this machine before, on the second

Re: Install Report (b-f 2.3.6 i386; floppy/net; standard)

2001-06-24 Thread Joey Hess
Anthony Towns wrote: base-config didn't keep what I told it You mean what you told dbootstrap, I take it. I think this will be fixed in the next boot-floppies rev, they were using mismatched names for passing the info. base-config also seemed to be a little confused about my proxy settings.

Install Report (b-f 2.3.6 i386; floppy/net; standard)

2001-06-24 Thread Anthony Towns
INSTALL REPORT (NOTE! Woody boot-floppies are *not* for the faint hearted!) Boot-Floppies: 2.3.6 (2001-06-21) Architecture: i386, idepci flavour Method: floppy install with rescue, root, drivers; net install (ftp.planetmirror.com.au; proxied) for base and standard Machine: ACER

Re: Install Report (b-f 2.3.6 i386; floppy/net; standard)

2001-06-24 Thread Ethan Benson
On Sun, Jun 24, 2001 at 03:57:45PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: in the next boot-floppies rev, they were using mismatched names for passing the info. fixed in CVS. The end result was 234MB used, which dropped to 174MB used when I ran apt-get clean. Which I have just added to base-config

Re: Woody install report

2001-05-13 Thread Adam Di Carlo
Can we make sure the proper bugs are filed against modconf, and other packages? We'll need to followup on the network freeze issue and see if we can resolve it. I might help to use an ethernet sniffer from another machine and see what it's trying to do. -- .Adam Di [EMAIL

Re: Woody install report

2001-05-12 Thread David Whedon
Fri, May 11, 2001 at 05:39:21PM +0200 wrote: Hello, On Monday I had to install my new box and decided to go for Woody directly. This is my report. thanks for the report. Install --- Ok, a normal floppies install. Oh, they were compiled for Spanish, so I could review the state of the

Woody install report

2001-05-11 Thread Jordi Mallach
Hello, On Monday I had to install my new box and decided to go for Woody directly. This is my report. Preparation --- Hardware: Duron 800, QDI motherboard with VIA chipset, rlt8139 ethernet card, Savage4 video card, 40Gb ata100 IDE drive. Boot-floppies: used those provided by manty, with

Re: 2.2.16? [INSTALL REPORT]

2000-07-02 Thread Randolph Chung
ok, some good news and some good news ... I am rather concerned about the modprobe reports posted to the list earlier. [ the gist of it is this message, on startup: ] modprobe: modprobe: Can't open dependencies file /lib/modules/2.2.17/modules.dep (No such file or directory) i was

Re: 2.2.16? [INSTALL REPORT]

2000-07-02 Thread Daniel Jacobowitz
On Sun, Jul 02, 2000 at 02:27:33PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote: Randolph Chung wrote: i was unable to pin this down, but it is indeed quite harmless if a bit annoying to the end user. This happens BEFORE init is run. I think Matt's explanation of unix.o is close (you do not get this message if

Re: 2.2.16? [INSTALL REPORT]

2000-07-02 Thread Randolph Chung
Speaking of modprobe... Is the "Note: /etc/modules.conf is more recent than /lib/modules/2.2.15/modules.dep" warning still present in modconf? If so, perhaps we should work around it; it's annoying. I didn't see it when i did the install this morning. randolph -- Debian Developer [EMAIL

<    7   8   9   10   11   12