Neale Banks wrote:
Extremely weird indeed - and raises the question of just how should we
generate Packages[.gz] which are acceptable to the current install tools.
Any suggestions?
Before, I was creating the Packages files, and did a 'gzip -c -9
Packages Packages.gz' to compress them. If I
On Mon, 21 May 2007, Daniel Baumann wrote:
Before, I was creating the Packages files, and did a 'gzip -c -9
Packages Packages.gz' to compress them. If I do them with 'cat
Packages | gzip --best Packages.gz', like debian-cd does it, then it
works.
Turns out this wasn't my problem (at least
On Sat, 19 May 2007, Daniel Baumann wrote:
Steve McIntyre wrote:
Hmmm. These look *very* similar to issues I've seen in the last few
months while hacking on debian-cd:
* shortcomings in busybox gunzip (#402482)
thanks ;)
i suspected 'corrupted' indices (or, indicies not the way
On Friday 18 May 2007 04:53, Neale Banks wrote:
But... I added a few more debs to the pool and rebuilt Packages[.gz]
with apt-ftparchive - now debootstrap complains:
If you change the Packages file, you also need to update the md5sum and
size in the Release file.
pgplb5BSfm8zx.pgp
Frans Pop wrote:
If you change the Packages file, you also need to update the md5sum and
size in the Release file.
same problem here, but *with* updated (and correct) Release file.
would it be of any help uploading a sample iso?
--
Address:Daniel Baumann, Burgunderstrasse 3, CH-4562
On Friday 18 May 2007 17:54, Daniel Baumann wrote:
Frans Pop wrote:
If you change the Packages file, you also need to update the md5sum
and size in the Release file.
same problem here, but *with* updated (and correct) Release file.
would it be of any help uploading a sample iso?
Suggest
Daniel Baumann wrote:
same problem here, but *with* updated (and correct) Release file.
You do know there are two separate Release files that need to be
updated?
--
see shy jo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Joey Hess wrote:
You do know there are two separate Release files that need to be
updated?
I only updated /dists/etch/Release, which one did I miss?
--
Address:Daniel Baumann, Burgunderstrasse 3, CH-4562 Biberist
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Internet:
Neale Banks wrote:
May 18 00:29:38 debootstrap:
/target/var/lib/apt/lists/debootstrap.invalid_dists_etch_main_binary-i386_Packages:
No such file or directory
May 18 00:29:38 debootstrap:
/target/var/lib/apt/lists/debootstrap.invalid_dists_etch_main_binary-i386_Packages:
No such file or
Daniel Baumann wrote:
I only updated /dists/etch/Release, which one did I miss?
as said on irc, the arch Release file in
/dists/etch/main/binary-*/Release do not need to be changed, and have no
influence to this bug anyway.
--
Address:Daniel Baumann, Burgunderstrasse 3, CH-4562
Joey Hess wrote:
This suggests that a deb is corrupt or is not being loaded properly,
since debootstrap uses ar to extract the first set of debs.
i even get those errors if I just 'unpack' the image, and re-assemble
it, without changing any .deb or .udeb.
as the initrd.gz is also unchanged, i
Joey Hess wrote:
Neale Banks wrote:
May 18 00:29:38 debootstrap:
/target/var/lib/apt/lists/debootstrap.invalid_dists_etch_main_binary-i386_Packages:
No such file
or directory
May 18 00:29:38 debootstrap:
/target/var/lib/apt/lists/debootstrap.invalid_dists_etch_main_binary-i386_Packages:
No
Steve McIntyre wrote:
Hmmm. These look *very* similar to issues I've seen in the last few
months while hacking on debian-cd:
* shortcomings in busybox gunzip (#402482)
thanks ;)
i suspected 'corrupted' indices (or, indicies not the way d-i wants
them) rather than corrputed busybox, because
Hi,
I've been, mostly successfully, customising the etch Netinst with
preseeding.
But... I added a few more debs to the pool and rebuilt Packages[.gz] with
apt-ftparchive - now debootstrap complains:
Warning: file:///cdrom/dists/etc/main/binary-i386/Packages.gz was corrupt
and
Warning:
14 matches
Mail list logo
