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

Groups > linux.debian.user > #190870 > unrolled thread

Debian iso installation incorrectly sets sources.list

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

Contents

  Debian iso installation incorrectly sets sources.list John Hosack <hosack410@gmail.com> - 2018-01-10 05:20 +0100
    Re: Debian iso installation incorrectly sets sources.list David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2018-01-10 05:40 +0100
    Re: Debian iso installation incorrectly sets sources.list The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2018-01-10 05:40 +0100
      Re: Debian iso installation incorrectly sets sources.list Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2018-01-10 11:50 +0100
        Re: Debian iso installation incorrectly sets sources.list Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2018-01-10 13:30 +0100
        Re: Debian iso installation incorrectly sets sources.list The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2018-01-10 13:40 +0100
        Re: Debian iso installation incorrectly sets sources.list David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2018-01-10 15:40 +0100
      Re: Debian iso installation incorrectly sets sources.list Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2018-01-14 10:00 +0100
        Re: Debian iso installation incorrectly sets sources.list Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com> - 2018-01-14 12:10 +0100
          Re: Debian iso installation incorrectly sets sources.list Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@surfnaked.ca> - 2018-01-15 02:00 +0100
    Re: Debian iso installation incorrectly sets sources.list Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com> - 2018-01-10 13:10 +0100
      Re: Debian iso installation incorrectly sets sources.list David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2018-01-10 16:00 +0100
        Re: Debian iso installation incorrectly sets sources.list Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com> - 2018-01-12 19:00 +0100
          Re: Debian iso installation incorrectly sets sources.list Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com> - 2018-01-13 14:30 +0100
            Re: Debian iso installation incorrectly sets sources.list Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2018-01-13 16:20 +0100
    Re: Debian iso installation incorrectly sets sources.list Jimmy Johnson <field.engineer@gmail.com> - 2018-01-10 14:50 +0100

#190870 — Debian iso installation incorrectly sets sources.list

Hello,

This is a bug report. I tried to use the reporting system, but it did not
seem to be appropriate. So, I will give a narrative:

This is what happened.
I decided to install Debian on my small machine (Asus eeePC 900A, 1GB
ram, 4GB storage).  So I selected debian-9.3.0-i386-xfce-CD-1.iso and
put it onto a flash memory stick.  Installation went ok, but
later on when I did "apt install gcc", the installation program
requested the insertion of the installation disk in the drive
/media/cdrom. Why?

Examination.
The /etc/apt/sources.list file had "deb: cdrom:[<installation>..." as
the first entry, and was not commented out. My installation medium
was wrong!

Solution.
Comment out "deb: cdrom:[<installation>..." in sources.list.

Discussion.
There are 2 problems:
(1) Installation should not put the installation medium in the
sources.list, at least not without asking the user,
since the medium may be reused.
(2) Installation should keep track of the installation medium;
if necessary by asking the user.
	(2) reflects a wider problem: Debian has a legacy of
assuming CD or DVD installation. But much is now done by
flash memory sticks. Debian should change to reflect this.
For example, the iso file names might be "large" (or "full")
or "small" (or "base"), not "DVD" or "CD". References
to "CD" or "DVD" should be replaced by  reference to the
"installation medium", unless "CD" is actually necessary. Etc.

Regards,
John Hosack

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#190871

On 01/09/18 19:54, John Hosack wrote:
> This is a bug report. I tried to use the reporting system, but it did not
> seem to be appropriate. So, I will give a narrative:
> 
> This is what happened.
> I decided to install Debian on my small machine (Asus eeePC 900A, 1GB
> ram, 4GB storage).  So I selected debian-9.3.0-i386-xfce-CD-1.iso and
> put it onto a flash memory stick.  Installation went ok, but
> later on when I did "apt install gcc", the installation program
> requested the insertion of the installation disk in the drive
> /media/cdrom. Why?
> 
> Examination.
> The /etc/apt/sources.list file had "deb: cdrom:[<installation>..." as
> the first entry, and was not commented out. My installation medium
> was wrong!
> 
> Solution.
> Comment out "deb: cdrom:[<installation>..." in sources.list.
> 
> Discussion.
> There are 2 problems:
> (1) Installation should not put the installation medium in the
> sources.list, at least not without asking the user,
> since the medium may be reused.
> (2) Installation should keep track of the installation medium;
> if necessary by asking the user.
> 	(2) reflects a wider problem: Debian has a legacy of
> assuming CD or DVD installation. But much is now done by
> flash memory sticks. Debian should change to reflect this.
> For example, the iso file names might be "large" (or "full")
> or "small" (or "base"), not "DVD" or "CD". References
> to "CD" or "DVD" should be replaced by  reference to the
> "installation medium", unless "CD" is actually necessary. Etc.

That's a feature, not a bug -- Debian has been doing it that way since 
at least version 2 (when I started using Debian).


David

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

#190872

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

On 2018-01-09 at 22:54, John Hosack wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> This is a bug report. I tried to use the reporting system, but it did not
> seem to be appropriate. So, I will give a narrative:

Bug reports need to be filed in the Debian bug tracker, on
bugs.debian.org, not mailed to debian-user. You can do that either by
E-mailing submit@bugs.debian.org with an appropriately-formatted E-mail,
or with the 'reportbug' program (which in fact generates and attempts to
send such an E-mail).

In the case of bugs in the installer, the correct (pseudo-)package to
file the bug against is probably 'installation-report'.

> This is what happened.
> I decided to install Debian on my small machine (Asus eeePC 900A, 1GB
> ram, 4GB storage).  So I selected debian-9.3.0-i386-xfce-CD-1.iso and
> put it onto a flash memory stick.  Installation went ok, but
> later on when I did "apt install gcc", the installation program
> requested the insertion of the installation disk in the drive
> /media/cdrom. Why?
> 
> Examination.
> The /etc/apt/sources.list file had "deb: cdrom:[<installation>..." as
> the first entry, and was not commented out. My installation medium
> was wrong!
> 
> Solution.
> Comment out "deb: cdrom:[<installation>..." in sources.list.
> 
> Discussion.
> There are 2 problems:
> (1) Installation should not put the installation medium in the
> sources.list, at least not without asking the user,
> since the medium may be reused.

The installation medium has to be present in sources.list during the
install process, in order for apt to be able to find the repository
contained on that medium.

In some cases, the user may decide after the initial OS install to
install additional packages which were available on the install medium.
To facilitate doing that (rather than downloading the packages over the
network, which may be expensive or impossible in some cases), the
sources.list entry is retained post-install, but commented out.

If the entry was not changed to be commented out during the conclusion
of the initial OS install procedure, that sounds like an issue indeed,
although a relatively minor one. But the inclusion of the entry in
sources.list is not an error, and ceasing to include such entries there
at all would be problematic.

> (2) Installation should keep track of the installation medium;
> if necessary by asking the user.

How? What information should it record, and how would this information
be useful?

> 	(2) reflects a wider problem: Debian has a legacy of
> assuming CD or DVD installation. But much is now done by
> flash memory sticks. Debian should change to reflect this.
> For example, the iso file names might be "large" (or "full")
> or "small" (or "base"), not "DVD" or "CD". References
> to "CD" or "DVD" should be replaced by  reference to the
> "installation medium", unless "CD" is actually necessary. Etc.

If I understand matters correctly, there is a not-purely-historical
reason for these names: the sizes of the images, particularly in the
case of multi-image sets, are determined based on what is expected to be
able to fit on a DVD or a CD.

Which is not to say that it would necessarily not be worth attempting to
modernize things here, as such optical media become more and more a
historical irrelevancy - just that it's not as trivial as you may think.

-- 
   The Wanderer

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all
progress depends on the unreasonable man.         -- George Bernard Shaw

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

#190881

On Tue, 2018-01-09 at 23:34 -0500, The Wanderer wrote:
> If the entry was not changed to be commented out during the conclusion
> of the initial OS install procedure, that sounds like an issue
> indeed, although a relatively minor one. But the inclusion of the
> entry in sources.list is not an error, and ceasing to include such
> entries there at all would be problematic.

The sources.list entry is for a cdrom that does not exist: the install
method was via a USB stick. That certainly seems like a bug to me (and
one that I've hit before myself: but I have not checked whether it is
already reported.)

Even if the OP left the install USB plugged into their machine, the
sources.list line would never work.

-- 
Jonathan Dowland

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

#190888

On 01/10/2018 04:41 AM, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> On Tue, 2018-01-09 at 23:34 -0500, The Wanderer wrote:
>> If the entry was not changed to be commented out during the conclusion
>> of the initial OS install procedure, that sounds like an issue
>> indeed, although a relatively minor one. But the inclusion of the
>> entry in sources.list is not an error, and ceasing to include such
>> entries there at all would be problematic.
>
> The sources.list entry is for a cdrom that does not exist: the install
> method was via a USB stick. That certainly seems like a bug to me (and
> one that I've hit before myself: but I have not checked whether it is
> already reported.)
>
> Even if the OP left the install USB plugged into their machine, the
> sources.list line would never work.
>

I'm not a programmer so I do not how difficult the *implementation* of a 
fix would be.

However it's *logic* could be simple.

IF desired CD is in drive
   THEN proceed normally
   END IF
IF any other CD of the set is in drive
   THEN prompt for desired CD to be placed in drive
ELSEIF any mounted device has appropriate LABEL or UUID
   THEN use it
ELSE prompt for desired CD to be placed in drive
ENDIF

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

#190889

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

On 2018-01-10 at 05:41, Jonathan Dowland wrote:

> On Tue, 2018-01-09 at 23:34 -0500, The Wanderer wrote:
> 
>> If the entry was not changed to be commented out during the
>> conclusion of the initial OS install procedure, that sounds like an
>> issue indeed, although a relatively minor one. But the inclusion of
>> the entry in sources.list is not an error, and ceasing to include
>> such entries there at all would be problematic.
> 
> The sources.list entry is for a cdrom that does not exist: the
> install method was via a USB stick. That certainly seems like a bug
> to me (and one that I've hit before myself: but I have not checked
> whether it is already reported.)
> 
> Even if the OP left the install USB plugged into their machine, the 
> sources.list line would never work.

I was assuming that, since the reason why this line is put there in the
first place is to enable the installer to find its package files, and
the install worked, the line was syntactically correct for enabling the
packages on the install device to be found. In other words, that the
'cdrom: ' pseudo-protocol name was a historical wart, and that the logic
which handles it would Do The Right Thing.

In hindsight after sleeping, this is not necessarily valid; Steve
McIntyre has already pointed out another assumption I hadn't realized I
was making, regarding the reason why the line wasn't commented out (when
I'd always seen it be), and it's entirely possible that there are
similarly invalid assumptions underlying my logic above.

-- 
   The Wanderer

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all
progress depends on the unreasonable man.         -- George Bernard Shaw

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

#190896

On Wed 10 Jan 2018 at 10:41:12 (+0000), Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> On Tue, 2018-01-09 at 23:34 -0500, The Wanderer wrote:
> > If the entry was not changed to be commented out during the conclusion
> > of the initial OS install procedure, that sounds like an issue
> > indeed, although a relatively minor one. But the inclusion of the
> > entry in sources.list is not an error, and ceasing to include such
> > entries there at all would be problematic.
> 
> The sources.list entry is for a cdrom that does not exist: the install
> method was via a USB stick. That certainly seems like a bug to me (and
> one that I've hit before myself: but I have not checked whether it is
> already reported.)
> 
> Even if the OP left the install USB plugged into their machine, the
> sources.list line would never work.

Isn't that what the command

apt-cdrom -d /mnt --no-auto-detect -m add

is for?                               ↑↑↑__command to scan the .iso
                                   ↑↑______don't mount anything (as already done)
                    ↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑_________leave any optical drives alone
           ↑↑↑↑↑↑__________________________here is the already mounted stick

Cheers,
David.

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

#191056

Le 10/01/2018 à 05:34, The Wanderer a écrit :
> 
> the sizes of the images, particularly in the
> case of multi-image sets, are determined based on what is expected to be
> able to fit on a DVD or a CD.

Not only. Otherwise, the #1 (bootable) DVD images would have a size of 
4.7 GB, like subsequent DVD images. Instead, they have a size of 4 GB 
only. AFAIK, this is so that it can fit in a 4-GB USB stick or as a file 
in a FAT filesystem.

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

#191058

Pascal wrote:
>Le 10/01/2018 à 05:34, The Wanderer a écrit :
>> 
>> the sizes of the images, particularly in the
>> case of multi-image sets, are determined based on what is expected to be
>> able to fit on a DVD or a CD.
>
>Not only. Otherwise, the #1 (bootable) DVD images would have a size of 
>4.7 GB, like subsequent DVD images. Instead, they have a size of 4 GB 
>only. AFAIK, this is so that it can fit in a 4-GB USB stick or as a file 
>in a FAT filesystem.

Exactly designed to fit on a 4GB USB stick, yes. But otherwise sizes
are designed to fit various optical media. I *have* pondered about
doing slightly-undersized "DL-DVD" sized media again to fit on 8GB
media, but not sure tbh...

-- 
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.                                steve@einval.com
"I suspect most samba developers are already technically insane... Of
 course, since many of them are Australians, you can't tell." -- Linus Torvalds

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

#191108

On 14/01/18 03:00 AM, Steve McIntyre wrote:

 > "I suspect most samba developers are already technically insane...
 > Of course, since many of them are Australians, you can't tell."
 >   -- Linus Torvalds

It's probably the exposure to Windows that does it.

-- 
cgibbs@surfnaked.ca (Charlie Gibbs)

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

#190887

hosack410@gmail.com wrote:
>
>This is a bug report. I tried to use the reporting system, but it did not
>seem to be appropriate. So, I will give a narrative:
>
>This is what happened.
>I decided to install Debian on my small machine (Asus eeePC 900A, 1GB
>ram, 4GB storage).  So I selected debian-9.3.0-i386-xfce-CD-1.iso and
>put it onto a flash memory stick.  Installation went ok, but
>later on when I did "apt install gcc", the installation program
>requested the insertion of the installation disk in the drive
>/media/cdrom. Why?
>
>Examination.
>The /etc/apt/sources.list file had "deb: cdrom:[<installation>..." as
>the first entry, and was not commented out. My installation medium
>was wrong!
>
>Solution.
>Comment out "deb: cdrom:[<installation>..." in sources.list.
>
>Discussion.
>There are 2 problems:
>(1) Installation should not put the installation medium in the
>sources.list, at least not without asking the user,
>since the medium may be reused.

This is a long-standing design decision that probably merits
re-examination, yes. The current logic assumes:

 * if you've used a "netinst" to install, then you won't want to use
   it again later, so it will be used by d-i then commented out later.

 * if you've used a bigger (set of) image(s), then you most likely
   will want to use this again in the future. This is to support
   people using CD/DVD media sets for installations. We should
   probably drop this for the single-CD xfce media at least.

>(2) Installation should keep track of the installation medium;
>if necessary by asking the user.
>	(2) reflects a wider problem: Debian has a legacy of
>assuming CD or DVD installation. But much is now done by
>flash memory sticks. Debian should change to reflect this.
>For example, the iso file names might be "large" (or "full")
>or "small" (or "base"), not "DVD" or "CD". References
>to "CD" or "DVD" should be replaced by  reference to the
>"installation medium", unless "CD" is actually necessary. Etc.

Agreed, yes. The way we use USB media in the installer at the moment
is to make them appear just like CDs. That works, but leads to odd
messages. We should fix up those messages, at the very least. It's on
my list...

-- 
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.                                steve@einval.com
We don't need no education.
We don't need no thought control.

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

#190898

On Wed 10 Jan 2018 at 11:34:57 (+0000), Steve McIntyre wrote:
> hosack410@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> >This is a bug report. I tried to use the reporting system, but it did not
> >seem to be appropriate. So, I will give a narrative:
> >
> >This is what happened.
> >I decided to install Debian on my small machine (Asus eeePC 900A, 1GB
> >ram, 4GB storage).  So I selected debian-9.3.0-i386-xfce-CD-1.iso and
> >put it onto a flash memory stick.  Installation went ok, but
> >later on when I did "apt install gcc", the installation program
> >requested the insertion of the installation disk in the drive
> >/media/cdrom. Why?
> >
> >Examination.
> >The /etc/apt/sources.list file had "deb: cdrom:[<installation>..." as
> >the first entry, and was not commented out. My installation medium
> >was wrong!
> >
> >Solution.
> >Comment out "deb: cdrom:[<installation>..." in sources.list.
> >
> >Discussion.
> >There are 2 problems:
> >(1) Installation should not put the installation medium in the
> >sources.list, at least not without asking the user,
> >since the medium may be reused.
> 
> This is a long-standing design decision that probably merits
> re-examination, yes. The current logic assumes:
> 
>  * if you've used a "netinst" to install, then you won't want to use
>    it again later, so it will be used by d-i then commented out later.
> 
>  * if you've used a bigger (set of) image(s), then you most likely
>    will want to use this again in the future. This is to support
>    people using CD/DVD media sets for installations. We should
>    probably drop this for the single-CD xfce media at least.

That sounds sensible …

> >(2) Installation should keep track of the installation medium;
> >if necessary by asking the user.
> >	(2) reflects a wider problem: Debian has a legacy of
> >assuming CD or DVD installation. But much is now done by
> >flash memory sticks. Debian should change to reflect this.
> >For example, the iso file names might be "large" (or "full")
> >or "small" (or "base"), not "DVD" or "CD". References
> >to "CD" or "DVD" should be replaced by  reference to the
> >"installation medium", unless "CD" is actually necessary. Etc.
> 
> Agreed, yes. The way we use USB media in the installer at the moment
> is to make them appear just like CDs. That works, but leads to odd
> messages. We should fix up those messages, at the very least. It's on
> my list...

… but you can almost never win at this game because there'll always
be someone who assumes or wants the opposite.

eg they do a netinst but leave out a package necessary to get
connected to the internet after they reboot;
or they install from a full DVD but then decide their connectivity
is good enough to rely instead entirely on the internet.

Perhaps /etc/apt/sources.list could have a one-line pointer to a text
file that explained the options available and how to achieve them.

Cheers,
David.

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

#190998

David Wright wrote:
>On Wed 10 Jan 2018 at 11:34:57 (+0000), Steve McIntyre wrote:

...

>> This is a long-standing design decision that probably merits
>> re-examination, yes. The current logic assumes:
>> 
>>  * if you've used a "netinst" to install, then you won't want to use
>>    it again later, so it will be used by d-i then commented out later.
>> 
>>  * if you've used a bigger (set of) image(s), then you most likely
>>    will want to use this again in the future. This is to support
>>    people using CD/DVD media sets for installations. We should
>>    probably drop this for the single-CD xfce media at least.
>
>That sounds sensible …

I've made this change now in my local copy of d-i and I'll be testing
shortly.

>> >(2) Installation should keep track of the installation medium;
>> >if necessary by asking the user.
>> >	(2) reflects a wider problem: Debian has a legacy of
>> >assuming CD or DVD installation. But much is now done by
>> >flash memory sticks. Debian should change to reflect this.
>> >For example, the iso file names might be "large" (or "full")
>> >or "small" (or "base"), not "DVD" or "CD". References
>> >to "CD" or "DVD" should be replaced by  reference to the
>> >"installation medium", unless "CD" is actually necessary. Etc.
>> 
>> Agreed, yes. The way we use USB media in the installer at the moment
>> is to make them appear just like CDs. That works, but leads to odd
>> messages. We should fix up those messages, at the very least. It's on
>> my list...
>
>… but you can almost never win at this game because there'll always
>be someone who assumes or wants the opposite.

We could do a better job, nonetheless - I can totally understand
people being confused by us talking about "CD" media when they're
using DVDs, let alone if they're using a USB stick!

>eg they do a netinst but leave out a package necessary to get
>connected to the internet after they reboot;
>or they install from a full DVD but then decide their connectivity
>is good enough to rely instead entirely on the internet.
>
>Perhaps /etc/apt/sources.list could have a one-line pointer to a text
>file that explained the options available and how to achieve them.

At the very least, to go with the change above I've added code to
(conditionally) add the following comment in sources.list:

# This system was installed using small removable media
# (e.g. netinst, live or single CD). The matching "deb cdrom"
# entries were disabled at the end of the installation process.
# For information about how to configure apt package sources,
# see the sources.list(5) manual.

-- 
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.                                steve@einval.com
"I suspect most samba developers are already technically insane... Of
 course, since many of them are Australians, you can't tell." -- Linus Torvalds

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

#191031

Steve McIntyre wrote:
>David Wright wrote:
>>On Wed 10 Jan 2018 at 11:34:57 (+0000), Steve McIntyre wrote:
>>> 
>>>  * if you've used a bigger (set of) image(s), then you most likely
>>>    will want to use this again in the future. This is to support
>>>    people using CD/DVD media sets for installations. We should
>>>    probably drop this for the single-CD xfce media at least.
>>
>>That sounds sensible …
>
>I've made this change now in my local copy of d-i and I'll be testing
>shortly.

Worked fine, so committed.

>>Perhaps /etc/apt/sources.list could have a one-line pointer to a text
>>file that explained the options available and how to achieve them.
>
>At the very least, to go with the change above I've added code to
>(conditionally) add the following comment in sources.list:
>
># This system was installed using small removable media
># (e.g. netinst, live or single CD). The matching "deb cdrom"
># entries were disabled at the end of the installation process.
># For information about how to configure apt package sources,
># see the sources.list(5) manual.

Also committed. Patches welcome for better wording...

-- 
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.                                steve@einval.com
"I suspect most samba developers are already technically insane... Of
 course, since many of them are Australians, you can't tell." -- Linus Torvalds

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

#191037

On Sat 13 Jan 2018 at 13:28:17 +0000, Steve McIntyre wrote:

> Steve McIntyre wrote:
> >David Wright wrote:
> 
> >>Perhaps /etc/apt/sources.list could have a one-line pointer to a text
> >>file that explained the options available and how to achieve them.
> >
> >At the very least, to go with the change above I've added code to
> >(conditionally) add the following comment in sources.list:
> >
> ># This system was installed using small removable media
> ># (e.g. netinst, live or single CD). The matching "deb cdrom"
> ># entries were disabled at the end of the installation process.
> ># For information about how to configure apt package sources,
> ># see the sources.list(5) manual.
> 
> Also committed. Patches welcome for better wording...

# This system was not installed using a DVD-1 image. Consequently,
# the  "deb cdrom" entry was ..........

-- 
Brian.

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

#190893

On 01/09/2018 07:54 PM, John Hosack wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> This is a bug report. I tried to use the reporting system, but it did not
> seem to be appropriate. So, I will give a narrative:
> 
> This is what happened.
> I decided to install Debian on my small machine (Asus eeePC 900A, 1GB
> ram, 4GB storage).  So I selected debian-9.3.0-i386-xfce-CD-1.iso and
> put it onto a flash memory stick.  Installation went ok, but
> later on when I did "apt install gcc", the installation program
> requested the insertion of the installation disk in the drive
> /media/cdrom. Why?
> 
> Examination.
> The /etc/apt/sources.list file had "deb: cdrom:[<installation>..." as
> the first entry, and was not commented out. My installation medium
> was wrong!

John I'm thinking you did not run 'apt update' before 'apt install'?

Cheers,
-- 
Jimmy Johnson

Debian Stretch - KDE Plasma 5.8.6 - AMD A8-7600 - EXT4 at sda6
Registered Linux User #380263

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

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

csiph-web