FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 07-29-2012, 12:34 PM
Heinz Diehl
 
Default installation fails

On 29.07.2012, Phil Dobbin wrote:

> I started using Fedora starting with Constantine & the hang always seems
> to happen at 'selinux-policy-targeted'

YES! Now that you are writing it, I remember. Here it "stops".

--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
 
Old 07-29-2012, 12:39 PM
Heinz Diehl
 
Default installation fails

On 29.07.2012, Michael Schwendt wrote:

> Depending on system speed. That's not a "hang", but the package scripts
> being busy working on something. Look what it does:
> rpm -q --scripts selinux-policy-targeted

It took around 20 min on an AMD quadcore 3.6 GHZ with 8 GB RAM and WD
Scorpio Black harddisk. That's quite some time on a reasonably fast
system, but anyway, that's not the problem.

> And it's a different issue than the final step.

Yes, I'll write a bugreport on that one.

--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
 
Old 07-29-2012, 02:05 PM
Tim
 
Default installation fails

On Sun, 2012-07-29 at 09:33 +0200, Heinz Diehl wrote:
> I have installed F17 on several different machines, and that "hang"
> occured in all of the installations, lasting clearly 15-20 min.

Obvious questions:

Are they slow computers?

Have you installed everything but the kitchen sink?

Are you updating a prior install?

--
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686

Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I
read messages from the public lists.



--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
 
Old 07-29-2012, 02:08 PM
Tim
 
Default installation fails

On Sun, 2012-07-29 at 12:59 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> The progress bar calculation would need to become very elegant,
> however, to not be degraded to Windows style installers, where it
> jumps back to 0%, then moves to 100% again, only to restart from 0% an
> unknown number of times. That may be good as a sign of life, but it's
> not really helpful as a progress status update.

Why has this become so bad? I've installed Linux since around the Red
Hat 5 days, and the install process was always rather clear. You had a
slow 0 to 100% of queued packages progress bar slowly advancing above a
percentage of the progress of current package being installed.

You could see that it was doing something, you could see what it was
doing.

--
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686

Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I
read messages from the public lists.



--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
 
Old 07-29-2012, 02:44 PM
Michael Schwendt
 
Default installation fails

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 23:38:06 +0930, Tim wrote:

> On Sun, 2012-07-29 at 12:59 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > The progress bar calculation would need to become very elegant,
> > however, to not be degraded to Windows style installers, where it
> > jumps back to 0%, then moves to 100% again, only to restart from 0% an
> > unknown number of times. That may be good as a sign of life, but it's
> > not really helpful as a progress status update.
>
> Why has this become so bad?

An Anaconda developer might be able to answer it.

The most basic progress bar implementation (0% => no packages installed
yet, 100% => all selected packages installed) is a rough approximation of
how much of the installation is done. Now add further steps to the
installation process, such as the "performing post-install configuration"
which modifies the installed system. How much of the 100% does that
account for? Perhaps 1% if it doesn't take much time. And what about
packages' post-install scripts? If installation of a special package takes
as much time as installing a hundred other packages, how to make that
clear in the progress bar? One could try to come up with a formula for an
approximation of an ETA value, but how accurate do you think that would
get?

Probably more important to the user is some sort of spinner, a sign of
life, indicating that the installer is still working on something.

> I've installed Linux since around the Red
> Hat 5 days, and the install process was always rather clear. You had a
> slow 0 to 100% of queued packages progress bar slowly advancing above a
> percentage of the progress of current package being installed.

Old Anaconda releases have displayed an ETA value instead, the "Remaining
time", approximated of course (but it has not been an accurate
approximation for many target machines, likely because the package
post-install scripts already had a large influence on the actual
installation time).

--
Fedora release 17 (Beefy Miracle) - Linux 3.4.6-2.fc17.x86_64
loadavg: 0.15 0.26 0.22
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
 
Old 07-29-2012, 05:34 PM
Phil Dobbin
 
Default installation fails

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Michael Schwendt wrote:

> On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 12:42:56 +0100, Phil Dobbin wrote:
>
>> I started using Fedora starting with Constantine & the hang always seems
>> to happen at 'selinux-policy-targeted' which is understandable when
>> using preupgrade but it happens also on a clean install which I did from
>> 15 -> 16.
>>
>> It's usually around twenty minutes or so.
>
> Depending on system speed. That's not a "hang", but the package scripts
> being busy working on something. Look what it does:
> rpm -q --scripts selinux-policy-targeted
>
> And it's a different issue than the final step.
>

Thanks, Michael.

I was alluding to the fact that that may the place where someone new to
the Fedora install process may think that maybe the installation had
somehow gone awry.

Cheers,

Phil...

- --
currently (ab)using
CentOS 6.2, Debian Squeeze, Fedora Beefy, OS X Snow Leopard, Ubuntu Precise

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin)
Comment: §auto-key-locate cert pka ldap hkp://keys.gnupg.net
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQFXQJAAoJEKuJdOaOnmMJYBAH+QER/Ncv6rQRCOA1U85bqM5z
CbPkef5ps7TJ5Yo/1lxWC11W52/Vd/bZN78hEjUAp6PwuYYg6dz2SE7QHPL3CPBl
fEzh9qrySZ6SjWBYaNl/Wm6eE5DfYskgmIbDNZgRTeHap8+pokFDHz8I+6kG7sd1
O+2hyyN98Kn6YsZdOlcs7J2uYW5im4Ro7pLT3dZx2UPQbS1TQ7 rsgQBYhuCl0rTs
9w9QzXokgSp1W5FkUj3hmWPVN4MJx112s6hmW76CBTU8BujnaF ePYZQPpH5y12Wz
GOQUOEr2f2/0+ANOtwa0KCK8mVo12A2OB2e5H+vTFF5v6d8jZcXl+XT8Wspik ek=
=EkJQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
 
Old 07-29-2012, 05:40 PM
Joe Zeff
 
Default installation fails

On 07/29/2012 03:59 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:

The progress bar calculation would need to become very elegant, however,
to not be degraded to Windows style installers, where it jumps back to 0%,
then moves to 100% again, only to restart from 0% an unknown number of
times. That may be good as a sign of life, but it's not really helpful as
a progress status update.


Back in the Bad Old Days before GUI installers, the installation program
would output a rather interesting series of characters:


-/- over and over. It would also put ^H, or backspace, between each
pair of characters, so they all appeared in the same place, making it
look like a spinning propeller. As long as it kept spinning, you knew
that the program was working. Sometimes it would pause for a few
seconds, then start up again, but it was never allowed to stay still for
minutes at a time, so you'd know that the program hadn't hung. A GUI
installer could easily do something similar.

--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
 
Old 07-29-2012, 08:13 PM
"Mikkel L. Ellertson"
 
Default installation fails

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 07/29/2012 07:33 AM, Heinz Diehl wrote:
> On 29.07.2012, Michael Schwendt wrote:
>
>> Would be easy to submit a bug report or RFE.
>
> Jepp, I'll do.
>
>> There's one bug report already that complains about a missing
Estimated
>> Time value, but I could not find a ticket specifically covering
the final
>> Verification step of all installed packages.
>>
>> The progress bar calculation would need to become very elegant
> [....]
>
> I think a progress bar or otherwise increasing counter isn't necessary
> at all. It would be sufficient if the user would be informed:
>
> "Now the istalled packets will be verified. Depending on your
installation, this
> can take from a few minutes up to half an hour. Please stand by."
>
> That's all it needs, telling the user that it's ok if the system
> doesn't "do anything" for a longer time.
>
I did an install of F17 from the live CD the other day, and it gave
you a message that it was going to take a while before the pause. I
am not sure if you see the same message from the install DVD.

Mikkel
- --
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and
taste good with Ketchup!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlAVmUgACgkQqbQrVW3JyMSZPwCdHxp/Vt6JRiB8dT7tibytXDNh
r2kAn3CW6qW87OG6J02almIGHV2xwpxx
=W90s
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
 
Old 07-30-2012, 08:02 AM
Heinz Diehl
 
Default installation fails

On 30.07.2012, Tim wrote:

> Are they slow computers?

I don't remember the machines I installed for others. As I wrote
before, I installed an AMD quadcore with 3.6GHz and 8 GB RAM with WD
Scorpio Black harddrives, which I consider as reasonably fast, and it
paused about 20 min.

> Have you installed everything but the kitchen sink?

I don't alter what the Fedora DVD suggests in the installation
process, and remove/install what I need/don't need after the
installation is finished.

> Are you updating a prior install?

No.

--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
 
Old 07-30-2012, 11:57 AM
Tim
 
Default installation fails

On Sun, 2012-07-29 at 16:44 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> Probably more important to the user is some sort of spinner, a sign of
> life, indicating that the installer is still working on something.

I hate those things. Quite apart from being visually annoying
animations, I'm sick of staring at some sort of "I'm busy" indicator
with absolutely no indication of what it's doing, what I'm waiting for,
how much longer I might be waiting for, etc. And I've seen plenty of
spinning busy indicators when nothing is happening, such as waiting
forever and a day for the video to load in a YouTube page, for instance.
So I don't hold them in high regard.

--
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686

Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I
read messages from the public lists.



--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 01:12 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org