Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #165431 > unrolled thread

Further to my installation error

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  Further to my installation error Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-03-15 20:10 +0100
    Re: Further to my installation error "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@galactic.demon.co.uk> - 2016-03-15 20:40 +0100
      Re: Further to my installation error Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-03-15 21:30 +0100
        Re: Further to my installation error doug <dmcgarrett@optonline.net> - 2016-03-15 22:00 +0100
          Re: Further to my installation error Adam Wilson <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2016-03-16 19:10 +0100
        Re: Further to my installation error Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-03-15 23:50 +0100
          Re: Further to my installation error David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2016-03-16 00:10 +0100
          Re: Further to my installation error Adam Wilson <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2016-03-16 19:10 +0100
            Re: Further to my installation error David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2016-03-18 22:00 +0100
              Re: Further to my installation error Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-03-18 23:30 +0100
                Re: Further to my installation error David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2016-03-19 02:30 +0100
                  Re: Further to my installation error Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-03-19 10:30 +0100
                  Re: Further to my installation error Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-03-20 13:10 +0100
                    Re: Further to my installation error Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-03-20 20:20 +0100
                      Re: Further to my installation error Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-03-20 20:30 +0100
                Re: Further to my installation error Adam Wilson <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2016-03-20 10:00 +0100
                  Re: Further to my installation error Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2016-03-20 10:40 +0100
                    Re: Further to my installation error Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-03-20 12:50 +0100
                      Re: Further to my installation error Adam Wilson <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2016-03-20 15:10 +0100
                      Re: Further to my installation error Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2016-03-20 17:00 +0100
                        Re: Further to my installation error Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-03-20 19:30 +0100
                        Re: Further to my installation error David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2016-03-20 23:20 +0100
                          Re: Further to my installation error Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-03-21 00:00 +0100
                    Re: Further to my installation error Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2016-03-20 14:50 +0100
                      Re: Further to my installation error Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2016-03-20 18:00 +0100
                        Re: Further to my installation error Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2016-03-20 19:50 +0100
                          Re: Further to my installation error Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2016-03-20 20:00 +0100
                            Re: Further to my installation error Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2016-03-25 20:50 +0100
                              Re: Further to my installation error Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2016-03-25 21:10 +0100
                                Re: Further to my installation error Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2016-03-26 10:50 +0100
                  Re: Further to my installation error David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2016-03-20 23:10 +0100
                    Re: Further to my installation error Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-03-21 00:10 +0100
                      Re: Further to my installation error David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2016-03-21 06:10 +0100
                        Re: Further to my installation error Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-03-21 10:30 +0100
              Re: Further to my installation error Adam Wilson <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2016-03-20 10:00 +0100
          Re: Further to my installation error Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-03-16 20:30 +0100
            Re: Further to my installation error Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2016-03-16 21:20 +0100
              Re: Further to my installation error Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-03-16 21:50 +0100
                Re: Further to my installation error Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-03-17 00:20 +0100
                Re: Further to my installation error Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2016-03-17 03:20 +0100
                Re: Further to my installation error Adam Wilson <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2016-03-17 17:40 +0100
                  Re: Further to my installation error Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2016-03-20 13:00 +0100
                    Re: Further to my installation error Adam Wilson <moxalt@riseup.net> - 2016-03-20 15:00 +0100
                      Re: Further to my installation error Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2016-03-20 16:00 +0100
                      Re: Further to my installation error Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2016-03-25 20:40 +0100

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#165711

On Sunday 20 March 2016 15:53:43 Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Sunday 20 March 2016 07:47:02 Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > On Sunday 20 March 2016 09:34:53 Gene Heskett wrote:
> > > On Sunday 20 March 2016 04:54:20 Adam Wilson wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 18 Mar 2016 22:21:58 +0000
> > > >
> > > > Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > On Friday 18 March 2016 20:49:55 David Wright wrote:
> > > > > > It's far more likely that you forgot to format the partition,
> > > > > > if that's indeed what you wanted to do.
> > > > >
> > > > > No.  I checked and double checked that the partitions on the
> > > > > disk which I wanted to use for installation were all marked with
> > > > > the F for format, and that nothing on the disk it had been told
> > > > > to leave alone had an F.  It kept wanting to format the spare
> > > > > disk's swap, which I did not want.
> > > >
> > > > Why not? You wanted to carry over the swap created by a previous
> > > > installation?
> > >
> > > Doing that, leaving a potentially dirty swap for a new install?  No
> > > sensible reason to do so, format that puppy.
> >
> > Am I the only person on this list who has ever wanted to install on
> > one disk and leave another alone for some reason? Surely not!!  I
> > wanted to install on sda and leave sdb alone.  So I told it not to use
> > sdb.  Not to format sdb. Not to touch sdb.  Why?  Because I didn't
> > want sdb touched.  I was not leaving a potentially dirty swap for a
> > new install.  I was telling the new install not to use the second
> > disk.  Sheesh.  When I could see I would just have disconnected sdb.
> > It would then have been left alone.  OK.
> >
> > I regard that as a sensible reason.
> >
> > Lisi
>
> The problem with that is that unless you edit fstab before the initial
> reboot, (difficult to do) to remove the auto-found swap partition on
> sdb, it will be found and mounted. But by then it likely has been
> formatted anyway.

I didn't and it didn't.

Lisi

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#165732

On Sun 20 Mar 2016 at 11:53:43 (-0400), Gene Heskett wrote:

> The problem with that is that unless you edit fstab before the initial 
> reboot, (difficult to do)

The d-i has a shell available. The file is /target/etc/fstab so
no difficulty there.

What some people *might* find difficult is fiddling with the home
directory before the inital reboot because it's created so late
in the process. However, there is a trick: when you are asked
whether the clock is on UTC, press GoBack at that point, because
the home directory has just been created (on /target of course).

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#165734

On Sunday 20 March 2016 22:15:16 David Wright wrote:
> On Sun 20 Mar 2016 at 11:53:43 (-0400), Gene Heskett wrote:
> > The problem with that is that unless you edit fstab before the initial
> > reboot, (difficult to do)
>
> The d-i has a shell available. The file is /target/etc/fstab so
> no difficulty there.
>
> What some people *might* find difficult is fiddling with the home
> directory before the inital reboot because it's created so late
> in the process. However, there is a trick: when you are asked
> whether the clock is on UTC, press GoBack at that point, because
> the home directory has just been created (on /target of course).


Thank you for a very useful tip!

Lisi

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#165683

Gene Heskett composed on 2016-03-20 05:34 (UTC-0400):

> Adam Wilson wrote:

>> On Fri, 18 Mar 2016 22:21:58 +0000 Lisi Reisz wrote:

>> > No.  I checked and double checked that the partitions on the disk
>> > which I wanted to use for installation were all marked with the F
>> > for format, and that nothing on the disk it had been told to leave
>> > alone had an F.  It kept wanting to format the spare disk's swap,
>> > which I did not want.

>> Why not? You wanted to carry over the swap created by a previous
>> installation?

> Doing that, leaving a potentially dirty swap for a new install?  No
> sensible reason to do so, format that puppy.

In multiboot, re-formatting swap is a problem creator. Mounting is generally 
via UUID. Formatting changes UUID. Missing UUID at boot usually means booting 
into rescue mode to repair fstab. So at best, assuming one swap per system 
and not mounting by device name, one installation *might be* benefited to the 
(probable) detriment of only one installation. In all other cases in which a 
unique swap per installation is not used (which never happens here), and swap 
mounting is not by device name (here, swap is often by device name), one 
installation might be benefited, to the detriment of multiple installations.
-- 
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

  Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#165704

On Sunday 20 March 2016 09:45:36 Felix Miata wrote:

> Gene Heskett composed on 2016-03-20 05:34 (UTC-0400):
> > Adam Wilson wrote:
> >> On Fri, 18 Mar 2016 22:21:58 +0000 Lisi Reisz wrote:
> >> > No.  I checked and double checked that the partitions on the disk
> >> > which I wanted to use for installation were all marked with the F
> >> > for format, and that nothing on the disk it had been told to
> >> > leave alone had an F.  It kept wanting to format the spare disk's
> >> > swap, which I did not want.
> >>
> >> Why not? You wanted to carry over the swap created by a previous
> >> installation?
> >
> > Doing that, leaving a potentially dirty swap for a new install?  No
> > sensible reason to do so, format that puppy.
>
> In multiboot, re-formatting swap is a problem creator. Mounting is
> generally via UUID. Formatting changes UUID. Missing UUID at boot
> usually means booting into rescue mode to repair fstab. So at best,
> assuming one swap per system and not mounting by device name, one
> installation *might be* benefited to the (probable) detriment of only
> one installation. In all other cases in which a unique swap per
> installation is not used (which never happens here), and swap mounting
> is not by device name (here, swap is often by device name), one
> installation might be benefited, to the detriment of multiple
> installations.

Faced with a similar problem as Lisi's during this install as I had 4 
drives in it then and 3 swaps mounted, I did remove the other drives, so 
my fstab is by UUID for everything I am using. Memory is now faint, but 
ISTR, when I first rebooted after plugging in the drive amanda uses as a 
tape vault, I ran blkid and used the UUID to add that drive to fstab.

When I do a new install, I generally do it on a new drive, but its been 
in the machine long enough to go get any firmware updates it needs and 
reflash them. Every drive I've bought locally or from NewEgg or Tiger 
Direct in the last 5 years has had old, buggy, sometimes slow firmware 
in it, so they all will probably need reflashed for using them for work.

I might add that my drive failure rate since I started doing that has 
fallen off a cliff.

sda says 23,000+ hours
sdb says 58,000+ hours

Now, I do note that sdb has a re-allocated sector count of 25, but no 
clue as to how many spares are left but that does sound like its time to 
retire it.  Both are older 1 terrabyte drives that I planned on 
replacing this summer. The newer crop of drives seems to be maturing, 
but I also expect the newer drives will be 4 kilobyte sectors too. 
Hopefully by then our disk tools will have caught up and can 
transparently use both GPT partitions AND 4Kb sectors.

The current boot drive is a 4Kb sector drive, and I frankly had one hell 
of a time using the installers disk tools, getting it properly aligned 
so its read/write speed was at least usable.

Thanks Felix & everybody that has read this far.

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#165714

Le 20/03/2016 17:56, Gene Heskett a écrit :
> Now, I do note that sdb has a re-allocated sector count of 25, but no
> clue as to how many spares are left

You can estimate it from the initial and current normalized values of 
the attribute.

Remaining = raw value * norm. value / (init. norm. value - norm. value)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#165719

On Sunday 20 March 2016 14:39:41 Pascal Hambourg wrote:

> Le 20/03/2016 17:56, Gene Heskett a écrit :
> > Now, I do note that sdb has a re-allocated sector count of 25, but
> > no clue as to how many spares are left
>
> You can estimate it from the initial and current normalized values of
> the attribute.
>
> Remaining = raw value * norm. value / (init. norm. value - norm.
> value)

But smartctl isn't spitting that data out.  It is a 1 terrabyte drive, is 
there a reserved percentage?

Thanks.

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#165951

Le 20/03/2016 19:58, Gene Heskett a écrit :
> On Sunday 20 March 2016 14:39:41 Pascal Hambourg wrote:
>
>> Le 20/03/2016 17:56, Gene Heskett a écrit :
>>> Now, I do note that sdb has a re-allocated sector count of 25, but
>>> no clue as to how many spares are left
>>
>> You can estimate it from the initial and current normalized values of
>> the attribute.
>>
>> Remaining = raw value * norm. value / (init. norm. value - norm.
>> value)
>
> But smartctl isn't spitting that data out.

What do you mean ? Doesn't 'smartctl -A' display the normalized and raw 
valued of the attributes ?

>  It is a 1 terrabyte drive, is there a reserved percentage?

AFAIK there is no standard about the reserved sector count, if this is 
what you want to know.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#165953

On Friday 25 March 2016 15:48:56 Pascal Hambourg wrote:

> Le 20/03/2016 19:58, Gene Heskett a écrit :
> > On Sunday 20 March 2016 14:39:41 Pascal Hambourg wrote:
> >> Le 20/03/2016 17:56, Gene Heskett a écrit :
> >>> Now, I do note that sdb has a re-allocated sector count of 25, but
> >>> no clue as to how many spares are left
> >>
> >> You can estimate it from the initial and current normalized values
> >> of the attribute.
> >>
> >> Remaining = raw value * norm. value / (init. norm. value - norm.
> >> value)
> >
> > But smartctl isn't spitting that data out.
>
> What do you mean ? Doesn't 'smartctl -A' display the normalized and
> raw valued of the attributes ?

It may, on newer drives, but not on these.

> >  It is a 1 terrabyte drive, is there a reserved percentage?
>
> AFAIK there is no standard about the reserved sector count, if this is
> what you want to know.

Thats what I was asking for, a way to tease that out.
ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME          FLAG     VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE      UPDATED  WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE
  1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate     0x000f   114   099   006    Pre-fail  Always       -       64516572
  3 Spin_Up_Time            0x0003   100   100   000    Pre-fail  Always       -       0
  4 Start_Stop_Count        0x0032   100   100   020    Old_age   Always       -       375
  5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct   0x0033   100   100   036    Pre-fail  Always       -       25
  7 Seek_Error_Rate         0x000f   081   060   030    Pre-fail  Always       -       147509778
  9 Power_On_Hours          0x0032   039   039   000    Old_age   Always       -       53804
 10 Spin_Retry_Count        0x0013   100   100   097    Pre-fail  Always       -       0
 12 Power_Cycle_Count       0x0032   100   100   020    Old_age   Always       -       380
184 End-to-End_Error        0x0032   100   100   099    Old_age   Always       -       0
187 Reported_Uncorrect      0x0032   100   100   000    Old_age   Always       -       0
188 Command_Timeout         0x0032   100   099   000    Old_age   Always       -       4
189 High_Fly_Writes         0x003a   001   001   000    Old_age   Always       -       291
190 Airflow_Temperature_Cel 0x0022   063   057   045    Old_age   Always       -       37 (Min/Max 26/41)
194 Temperature_Celsius     0x0022   037   043   000    Old_age   Always       -       37 (0 18 0 0 0)
195 Hardware_ECC_Recovered  0x001a   025   022   000    Old_age   Always       -       64516572
197 Current_Pending_Sector  0x0012   100   100   000    Old_age   Always       -       0
198 Offline_Uncorrectable   0x0010   100   100   000    Old_age   Offline      -       0
199 UDMA_CRC_Error_Count    0x003e   200   200   000    Old_age   Always       -       0
240 Head_Flying_Hours       0x0000   100   253   000    Old_age   Offline      -       53800 (168 12 0)
241 Total_LBAs_Written      0x0000   100   253   000    Old_age   Offline      -       3559232973
242 Total_LBAs_Read         0x0000   100   253   000    Old_age   Offline      -       3031833807

SMART Error Log Version: 1
No Errors Logged

On the drive which does have some "re-allocated sectors", and I read that
24 of 36 as getting uncomfortably close to the far end of the bathtub
curve. I should be acquiring a fresh drive to assure continuity,

Thanks.

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#165968

Gene Heskett a écrit :
> On Friday 25 March 2016 15:48:56 Pascal Hambourg wrote:
> 
>> Le 20/03/2016 19:58, Gene Heskett a écrit :
>>> On Sunday 20 March 2016 14:39:41 Pascal Hambourg wrote:
>>>> Le 20/03/2016 17:56, Gene Heskett a écrit :
>>>>> Now, I do note that sdb has a re-allocated sector count of 25, but
>>>>> no clue as to how many spares are left
>>>> You can estimate it from the initial and current normalized values
>>>> of the attribute.
>>>>
>>>> Remaining = raw value * norm. value / (init. norm. value - norm.
>>>> value)
(...)
> ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME          FLAG     VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE      UPDATED  WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE
(...)
>   5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct   0x0033   100   100   036    Pre-fail  Always       -       25
(...)
> On the drive which does have some "re-allocated sectors", and I read that
> 24 of 36 as getting uncomfortably close to the far end of the bathtub
> curve. I should be acquiring a fresh drive to assure continuity,

I think you're misinterpreting the numbers.

25 is the raw value (RAW_VALUE), the actual reallocated sector count.
36 is the threshold (THRESH) of the normalized value, not of the raw value.
The normalized value (VALUE) is 100.

The normalized value decreases towards 0 as the raw value increases. As
long as the normalized value remains above the threshold, things are
supposed to be fine. However thresholds are somewhat arbitrary.

Here we can see (also from other attributes) that :
- The initial normalized value is 100. This may vary among vendors and
models.
- The threshold is reached when the remaining reserved sector count has
decreased to 36% (threshold / initial value) of the initial count,
whatever it is.
- The current normalized value is still the initial value, so less than
1% of the reserved sector count has be consumed. However we cannot
estimate the total reserved sector count, only that it must be at least
2500 (25 / 1%).

Do you feel more comfortable now ?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#165731

On Sun 20 Mar 2016 at 11:54:20 (+0300), Adam Wilson wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Mar 2016 22:21:58 +0000
> Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Friday 18 March 2016 20:49:55 David Wright wrote:
> > > It's far more likely that you forgot to format the partition, if
> > > that's indeed what you wanted to do.  
> > 
> > No.  I checked and double checked that the partitions on the disk
> > which I wanted to use for installation were all marked with the F for
> > format, and that nothing on the disk it had been told to leave alone
> > had an F.  It kept wanting to format the spare disk's swap, which I
> > did not want.
> 
> Why not? You wanted to carry over the swap created by a previous
> installation?

Neither grub nor the installer handle partition labels very well.
If you've labelled your swap partition, letting the installer
loose on it means you have to restore the label each time.

The d-i does want to format it, and it's fairly insistent that it at
least be given one to use, but it can be dissuaded from both.
The documentation also tells you not to
# mkswap -L abcd00 /dev/sdz9
# swapon /dev/sdz9
after the partitioner has run but before the base installation, but
I've had no problems doing that in the past. (Remember installing
linux on a Texas Travelmate with 8MB memory...)

All this may be different for people encrypting swap or using
containers etc.

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#165736

On Sunday 20 March 2016 22:00:01 David Wright wrote:
> On Sun 20 Mar 2016 at 11:54:20 (+0300), Adam Wilson wrote:
> > On Fri, 18 Mar 2016 22:21:58 +0000
> >
> > Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Friday 18 March 2016 20:49:55 David Wright wrote:
> > > > It's far more likely that you forgot to format the partition, if
> > > > that's indeed what you wanted to do.
> > >
> > > No.  I checked and double checked that the partitions on the disk
> > > which I wanted to use for installation were all marked with the F for
> > > format, and that nothing on the disk it had been told to leave alone
> > > had an F.  It kept wanting to format the spare disk's swap, which I
> > > did not want.
> >
> > Why not? You wanted to carry over the swap created by a previous
> > installation?
>
> Neither grub nor the installer handle partition labels very well.
> If you've labelled your swap partition, letting the installer
> loose on it means you have to restore the label each time.
>
> The d-i does want to format it, and it's fairly insistent that it at
> least be given one to use, but it can be dissuaded from both.

It had one - on sda.  It wanted the one on sdb as well.  I wanted the one on 
sdb left alone.  I got what I wanted when I insisted, and the resultant 
installation was quite happy just using the one disk.  And the swap partition 
on sdb kept its UUID intact.  So all is well that ends well.

Lisi

> The documentation also tells you not to
> # mkswap -L abcd00 /dev/sdz9
> # swapon /dev/sdz9
> after the partitioner has run but before the base installation, but
> I've had no problems doing that in the past. (Remember installing
> linux on a Texas Travelmate with 8MB memory...)
>
> All this may be different for people encrypting swap or using
> containers etc.
>
> Cheers,
> David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#165748

On 03/20/2016 04:00 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> It had one - on sda.  It wanted the one on sdb as well.  I wanted the one on
> sdb left alone.  I got what I wanted when I insisted, and the resultant
> installation was quite happy just using the one disk.  And the swap partition
> on sdb kept its UUID intact.  So all is well that ends well.

When installing Debian or any other O/S, I've learned the hard way that 
it is best to unplug all the drives except the drive(s) that I'm 
installing onto.  Sometimes, this means additional work after 
installation; but, "better safe than sorry".


David

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#165759

On Monday 21 March 2016 05:02:12 David Christensen wrote:
> On 03/20/2016 04:00 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > It had one - on sda.  It wanted the one on sdb as well.  I wanted the one
> > on sdb left alone.  I got what I wanted when I insisted, and the
> > resultant installation was quite happy just using the one disk.  And the
> > swap partition on sdb kept its UUID intact.  So all is well that ends
> > well.
>
> When installing Debian or any other O/S, I've learned the hard way that
> it is best to unplug all the drives except the drive(s) that I'm
> installing onto.  Sometimes, this means additional work after
> installation; but, "better safe than sorry".

<quote>
When I could see I would just 
have disconnected sdb.  It would then have been left alone.
</quote.

Nothing like dancing on a man (Or a woman. ;-)  ) when (s)he is down!!

Lisi

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#165669

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Fri, 18 Mar 2016 15:49:55 -0500
David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote:

> On Wed 16 Mar 2016 at 14:49:44 (+0300), Adam Wilson wrote:
> > On Tue, 15 Mar 2016 22:41:14 +0000 Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >   
> > > So - if you want to format an existing partition properly, so the
> > > stuff on it actually goes, use Gparted not the partitioner in the
> > > Jessie installer.  Sad.  
> 
> I can't see why Lisi came to that conclusion from what she reported
> here.
> 
> > Is it possible for the d-i partitioning utility to sometimes make
> > mistakes when creating a new FS (I have only observed this with
> > ext4, if it even happened at all and was not a product of my
> > imagination) and somehow leave files from the old FS in the new
> > over-riding FS if the two are in the same partition?
> > 
> > Sometimes after over-writing an old ext4 partition with a new ext4
> > partition of the same size and location, mysterious files have
> > appeared in the new FS which should not exist, but existed in the
> > previous instance; "ghost files" if you will.  
> 
> It's far more likely that you forgot to format the partition, if
> that's indeed what you wanted to do.
> 
> "over-writing an old ext4 partition with a new ext4 partition of the
> same size and location" is exactly what one does if the partition
> table gets mangled. People who do that will then cross their fingers
> and hope that *all* the pre-existing files reappear. They're not
> "ghost" files; they're the actual files which should be untouched by
> repartitioning.
> 
> Some people really can't get on with the d-i partitioner/formatter.
> At least in its curses mode, it's not the easiest interface. (I've
> never tried the graphical version.)

The graphical version is literally a GTK clone of the curses-based
interface. It responds to exactly the same commands- if one were to
close one's eyes and carry out a series of curses interface operations
with keypresses then exactly the same result would be achieved.

I actually really like the partitioner in d-i. It is a nice mix between
user-friendliness (you can just select "guided" if you don't know what
you're doing, and there are nice lists of options for everything) and
usability for more advanced users.

It provides a unified interface for setting mount options, filesystems,
partitioning, etc. rather than the fdisk + mkfs approach.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#165502

On Tue 15 Mar 2016 at 22:41:14 +0000, Lisi Reisz wrote:

> On Tuesday 15 March 2016 20:22:23 Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > So I am trying to use Gparted on Knoppix to wipe the disk thoroughly and
> > I'll try in order (with a good Gparted wipe in between) Net install 8.02
> 
> Worked a treat.  No further problems.  OS and DE fully installed and am 
> installing extras like LibreOffice etc., and configuring it for the user.  It 
> will be fully operational before I go to bed, as I had promised.
> 
> So - if you want to format an existing partition properly, so the stuff on it 
> actually goes, use Gparted not the partitioner in the Jessie installer.  Sad.

The installer on a netinst image is identical to the one on CD-1, the 
only difference being that GNOME packages are got from CD-1 rather than
downloading them from the internet. This is well after the partitioning
stage. Nevertheless, strange.

> Pity it took me until it tried to use CD1 to do a net-install to realise 
> that!!  And I have now run out of writable CDs. :-(  I had just enough for 
> this shenanigans!

Why any Debian user should use an antiquated technology to install is
beyond me. USB sticks are two a penny. Isohybrid images rule; OK!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#165505

Brian composed on 2016-03-16 19:21 (UTC):

> On Tue 15 Mar 2016 at 22:41:14 +0000, Lisi Reisz wrote:

>> Pity it took me until it tried to use CD1 to do a net-install to realise
>> that!!  And I have now run out of writable CDs. :-(  I had just enough for
>> this shenanigans!

> Why any Debian user should use an antiquated technology to install is
> beyond me. USB sticks are two a penny. Isohybrid images rule; OK!

USB sticks, being of a non-uniform variety of sizes, shapes, speed, and 
reliability, are a pain to library. Inferior amount of space on which to 
write on them contributes to the library problem. Pricing of USB sticks on a 
per device basis remains much higher than OM, making creation of a single 
device for single purpose generally much more expensive than OM. There still 
exist working puters that cannot boot USB. I have several.

Not that I routinely burn OM to install Linux. For that I usually don't burn 
anything, instead installing by loading an installation kernel and initrd 
with an already installed bootloader. HTTP installation means up-to-date at 
the outset.
-- 
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

  Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#165507

On Wed 16 Mar 2016 at 16:12:20 -0400, Felix Miata wrote:

> Brian composed on 2016-03-16 19:21 (UTC):
> 
> >On Tue 15 Mar 2016 at 22:41:14 +0000, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> 
> >>Pity it took me until it tried to use CD1 to do a net-install to realise
> >>that!!  And I have now run out of writable CDs. :-(  I had just enough for
> >>this shenanigans!
> 
> >Why any Debian user should use an antiquated technology to install is
> >beyond me. USB sticks are two a penny. Isohybrid images rule; OK!
> 
> USB sticks, being of a non-uniform variety of sizes, shapes, speed, and
> reliability, are a pain to library. Inferior amount of space on which to
> write on them contributes to the library problem. Pricing of USB sticks on a
> per device basis remains much higher than OM, making creation of a single
> device for single purpose generally much more expensive than OM. There still
> exist working puters that cannot boot USB. I have several.

So do I. There are ways round it.

But the vast majortiy of users are not using the ancient machines you
and I have. The OP is at liberty to indicate whether her machine falls
into this class. A round shiny disc could be her only solution to
booting a Debian image.

> Not that I routinely burn OM to install Linux. For that I usually don't burn
> anything, instead installing by loading an installation kernel and initrd
> with an already installed bootloader. HTTP installation means up-to-date at
> the outset.

This makes installing Debian straightforward for everyone? Compared with
just putting an image on a USB stick?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#165512

On Wednesday 16 March 2016 20:49:28 Brian wrote:
> But the vast majortiy of users are not using the ancient machines you
> and I have. The OP is at liberty to indicate whether her machine falls
> into this class. A round shiny disc could be her only solution to
> booting a Debian image.

In this case no.   But I have had several failures recently with USB sticks, 
including but not limited to one where the machine couldn't boot from most 
USB media.

And as Felix says, CDs are cheaper, easier to label, easier to store, easier 
to give away and generally more flexible IMHO.  But I also prefer 
non-electronic stoves.  Not that I can get one. :-(.

This one wasn't an ancient machine.  But I handle more ancient machines than 
modern ones.  I call  3 1/2 years old new, to establish what we mean by new 
and old.

Lisi

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#165515

Brian composed on 2016-03-16 20:49 (UTC):

> On Wed 16 Mar 2016 at 16:12:20 -0400, Felix Miata wrote:

>> Brian composed on 2016-03-16 19:21 (UTC):

>> >Why any Debian user should use an antiquated technology to install is
>> >beyond me. USB sticks are two a penny. Isohybrid images rule; OK!

>> USB sticks, being of a non-uniform variety of sizes, shapes, speed, and
>> reliability, are a pain to library. Inferior amount of space on which to
>> write on them contributes to the library problem. Pricing of USB sticks on a
>> per device basis remains much higher than OM, making creation of a single
>> device for single purpose generally much more expensive than OM. There still
>> exist working puters that cannot boot USB. I have several.

> So do I. There are ways round it.

Around which do you refer to with "it"?

> A round shiny disc could be her only solution to booting a Debian image.

Of course.

>> Not that I routinely burn OM to install Linux. For that I usually don't burn
>> anything, instead installing by loading an installation kernel and initrd
>> with an already installed bootloader. HTTP installation means up-to-date at
>> the outset.

> This makes installing Debian straightforward for everyone?

I wasn't suggesting anything about straightforward, just providing some 
context based on how things go around here. My installations are far more 
often pre-releases, so discs burned from isos would infrequently get repeated 
use. A lot of time would be wasted downloading isos full of 
never-to-be-installed packages instead of downloading needed packages that 
might be replaced on the mirrors even before the package completes downloading.

> Compared with just putting an image on a USB stick?

With the result that the installation is already fully up-to-date when the 
installation process exits?

Lots of ways to skin these Linux cats.
-- 
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

  Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web