It seems to me that bug#494422 origins as the fix for bug#356850[2]
Generally I am worried about initramfs-tools being so invasive (see
bug#494422 - especially Max seemingly recommending[3] to reinstall from
time to time - slowly upgrading is not expected to work).
Please cc me on replies - I am not subscribed to -devel.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
08-27-2008, 11:05 AM
maximilian attems
Is it a "user error" to use lilo?
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 12:43:10PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Hi fellow developers,
>
> Please someone help look at bug#494422.
>
> What is wrong with my judgement[1]?
you are totaly misinformed as usual,
don't mess with bugs you have zero knownledge with.
> It seems to me that bug#494422 origins as the fix for bug#356850[2]
>
> Generally I am worried about initramfs-tools being so invasive (see
> bug#494422 - especially Max seemingly recommending[3] to reinstall from
> time to time - slowly upgrading is not expected to work).
kernel-img.conf(5) has nothing to do with initramfs-tools.
there you'll find do_bootloader documented.
kthxbye
--
maks
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
08-27-2008, 12:02 PM
Bjørn Mork
Is it a "user error" to use lilo?
maximilian attems <max@stro.at> writes:
> kernel-img.conf(5) has nothing to do with initramfs-tools.
> there you'll find do_bootloader documented.
I am glad you are referring to this man page. I found myself looking
for it a while ago, surprised to find that it wasn't installed on the
system in question. A little searchin told me that was because it's
part of kernel-package and therefore not installed on most systems
having a /etc/kernel-img.conf file.
Maybe this essential documentation should be split out to a separate
package depended on by initramfs-tools, linux-image-* and possibly other
packages using /etc/kernel-img.conf?
Bjørn
--
You must be a real weasel to think that if you've seen one source
license, you've seen them all
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
08-27-2008, 12:13 PM
Jonas Smedegaard
Is it a "user error" to use lilo?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 01:05:42PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
>On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 12:43:10PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>> Hi fellow developers,
>>
>> Please someone help look at bug#494422.
>>
>> What is wrong with my judgement[1]?
>
>you are totaly misinformed as usual,
Perhaps uninformed - thanks to your one-liner bug-closures
>don't mess with bugs you have zero knownledge with.
I promise you that I won't ever do that, and claim that I have never
ever done so before in my entire life.
What was the relevance of your remark? Did you perhaps forget a smiley?
>> It seems to me that bug#494422 origins as the fix for bug#356850[2]
>>
>> Generally I am worried about initramfs-tools being so invasive (see
>> bug#494422 - especially Max seemingly recommending[3] to reinstall from
>> time to time - slowly upgrading is not expected to work).
>
>kernel-img.conf(5) has nothing to do with initramfs-tools.
>there you'll find do_bootloader documented.
You mean this?:
>do_bootloader
> If set to NO, this prevents the postinst from running the boot
> loader. Defaults to Yes.
So do_bootloader is a flag solely for the use by Linux kerne packages'
postinst script.
If this issue is unrelated to initramfs-tools, why did you close it?
Why not reassign to the proper package instead?
- Jonas
- --
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/
[x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
08-27-2008, 12:15 PM
maximilian attems
Is it a "user error" to use lilo?
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 02:02:06PM +0200, Bjørn Mork wrote:
> maximilian attems <max@stro.at> writes:
>
> > kernel-img.conf(5) has nothing to do with initramfs-tools.
> > there you'll find do_bootloader documented.
>
> I am glad you are referring to this man page. I found myself looking
> for it a while ago, surprised to find that it wasn't installed on the
> system in question. A little searchin told me that was because it's
> part of kernel-package and therefore not installed on most systems
> having a /etc/kernel-img.conf file.
>
> Maybe this essential documentation should be split out to a separate
> package depended on by initramfs-tools, linux-image-* and possibly other
> packages using /etc/kernel-img.conf?
kernel-img.conf does not pertain to any package, this is meant to be solved
postlenny by linux images using debian kernel toolkit [1]
kind regards
--
maks
[1] http://multibuild.org/documentation/dkt
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
08-27-2008, 12:15 PM
Luca Capello
Is it a "user error" to use lilo?
Hi!
On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 14:02:06 +0200, Bjørn Mork wrote:
> maximilian attems <max@stro.at> writes:
>> kernel-img.conf(5) has nothing to do with initramfs-tools.
>> there you'll find do_bootloader documented.
>
> I am glad you are referring to this man page. I found myself looking
> for it a while ago, surprised to find that it wasn't installed on the
> system in question. A little searchin told me that was because it's
> part of kernel-package and therefore not installed on most systems
> having a /etc/kernel-img.conf file.
This is even worse, considering that kernel-package ATM is unfit for
release (bug #475036 [1]).
Using latest initramfs-tools with lilo works for me, provided that the
new large-memory feature is enabled.
As maks says, user error applies here.
William
On Wed, 2008-08-27 at 12:43 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi fellow developers,
>
> Please someone help look at bug#494422.
>
> What is wrong with my judgement[1]?
>
>
> It seems to me that bug#494422 origins as the fix for bug#356850[2]
>
> Generally I am worried about initramfs-tools being so invasive (see
> bug#494422 - especially Max seemingly recommending[3] to reinstall from
> time to time - slowly upgrading is not expected to work).
>
>
> Please cc me on replies - I am not subscribed to -devel.
>
> - Jonas
>
>
> [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=494422#50
> [2] bug#http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=356850
> [3] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=385949#29
>
> - --
> * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt
> * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/
>
> [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAki1L74ACgkQn7DbMsAkQLjjgQCeKVQ4n8yHVn t9AfTV6L8sLw/C
> aZsAn0zrptW5TCEuZUF1FOmvwRG7ptUo
> =1m91
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
08-27-2008, 01:41 PM
Jonas Smedegaard
Is it a "user error" to use lilo?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 08:15:09AM -0500, William Pitcock wrote:
>Using latest initramfs-tools with lilo works for me, provided that the
>new large-memory feature is enabled.
>
>As maks says, user error applies here.
Entirely or partly?
If I understand that bugreport correctly, the bugreporter had LILO
installed but did not use it:
> I reboot the system and surprise: grub was *overwritten* by lilo!!!
and later
> Why was grub overwritten by lilo? Will running "grub-install (hd0,0)"
> fix the problem?
I agree with Martin[1] that parts of the bugreport is a known LILO bug,
but also agree with him that more than that is going on.
Original bugreporter is satisfied that his system works - but please
note that in addition to fixing that known bug, the LILO package is also
removed.
Harrasing LILO users by silencing bugreports about problems[2] using it
is the wrong approach. If LILO is officially unsupported by Debian (not
only by kernel team and/or initramfs-tools maintainer) we should drop
that package from the archive!
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
08-27-2008, 02:07 PM
William Pitcock
Is it a "user error" to use lilo?
Hi,
On Wed, 2008-08-27 at 15:41 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>
> Harrasing LILO users by silencing bugreports about problems[2] using
> it
> is the wrong approach. If LILO is officially unsupported by Debian
> (not
> only by kernel team and/or initramfs-tools maintainer) we should drop
> that package from the archive!
I am LILO's maintainer. It is hardly unsupported, infact it is supported
better now than it has been in a long time. While I do plan to drop it
post-lenny, it will certaintly be supported for lenny's release
lifecycle.
The initramfs-tools maintainer does not support any bootloader. It is
not their place to support any bootloaders.
I think it is absurd that you claim you are being silenced when you are
not.
If you have both GRUB and LILO installed, there will be problems. That
is infact, a bug. They should Conflict with each other to ensure that
only one can be installed at a time, but it is a minor bug at best, as
any smart user would not have both bootloaders installed. And infact,
any typical user would not install a second bootloader.
William
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
08-27-2008, 02:40 PM
Julien BLACHE
Is it a "user error" to use lilo?
William Pitcock <nenolod@dereferenced.org> wrote:
Hi,
> If you have both GRUB and LILO installed, there will be problems. That
> is infact, a bug. They should Conflict with each other to ensure that
> only one can be installed at a time, but it is a minor bug at best, as
There's no reason why the LILO and GRUB packages should conflict. I
want to use LILO on my machine because GRUB fails miserably, yet I
need GRUB to generate a GRUB boot-floppy.
Is it a "user error" to use lilo?
