-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Frans Pop wrote:
Instead of 'db_go || exit 30' it is probably better to use 'db_go || exit 10'.
Please change that in the patch I proposed.
What is the difference?
Either way, could you point me to the meaning of these error codes? It seems I
On Saturday 20 January 2007 09:05, Eddy Petrișor wrote:
Frans Pop wrote:
Instead of 'db_go || exit 30' it is probably better to use 'db_go ||
exit 10'. Please change that in the patch I proposed.
What is the difference?
Either way, could you point me to the meaning of these error codes?
Instead of 'db_go || exit 30' it is probably better to use 'db_go || exit 10'.
Please change that in the patch I proposed.
pgpwBljoCMqHy.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Thursday 18 January 2007 21:08, Eddy Petrișor wrote:
No. The ppp dir is copied nowhere else and copying this way _only_
works because the files pap/chap-secrets and peers/provider already
exist in _/target_ because the ppp deb installs default files there
that already have the correct
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Frans Pop wrote:
On Monday 15 January 2007 15:34, you wrote:
Yes, I know, I am aware of this issue and was aware of it from the
start. The main problem is that the interfaces file does not allow
comments at the end of lines with useful
On Jan 18, Eddy Petri??or [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In order for this to work, the interface name should be preserved. This
happens, AFAIK, even for interfaces which are not configured, right?
Yes, the same rules for persistent names generated and used by d-i are
installed on the target.
--
On Thursday 18 January 2007 10:33, Eddy Petrișor wrote:
db_input high ppp/username || true
-db_go || true
+db_go || exit 30
What is the difference induced by return code 30? Will it make the
installation fail if ran non-interactively and this data is not
provided?
(I don't seem to be
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Frans Pop wrote:
On Thursday 18 January 2007 10:33, Eddy Petrișor wrote:
db_input high ppp/username || true
-db_go || true
+db_go || exit 30
What is the difference induced by return code 30? Will it make the
installation fail if ran
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Eddy Petrișor wrote:
Frans Pop wrote:
On Tuesday 09 January 2007 19:07, Eddy Petrişor wrote:
Attached is a patch that closes a few open issues with the ppp-udeb.
The most important are #402450 (not bringing up the interface after
install and not
Frans Pop wrote:
On Tuesday 09 January 2007 19:07, Eddy Petrişor wrote:
Attached is a patch that closes a few open issues with the ppp-udeb.
The most important are #402450 (not bringing up the interface after
install and not saving a correspondent section in the target
On Tuesday 09 January 2007 19:07, Eddy Petrişor wrote:
Attached is a patch that closes a few open issues with the ppp-udeb.
The most important are #402450 (not bringing up the interface after
install and not saving a correspondent section in the target
/etc/network/interfaces) and the handling
Package: ppp
Tags: patch d-i
Severity: important
Hello,
Attached is a patch that closes a few open issues with the ppp-udeb.
The most important are #402450 (not bringing up the interface after
install and not saving a correspondent section in the target
/etc/network/interfaces) and the handling
12 matches
Mail list logo
