Installation without burning iso-images into cd's?
Hi! Is it possible to install beta2 without burning iso-images into cd's? What are the right steps to do it (where I put iso-images and how I start the installation)? I have Suse 9.3 installed already and I want to install beta on side of it in a another partition (15 Gb). -Jukka
On 8/20/05, Jukka
Is it possible to install beta2 without burning iso-images into cd's? What are the right steps to do it (where I put iso-images and how I start the installation)? I have Suse 9.3 installed already and I want to install beta on side of it in a another partition (15 Gb).
IIRC there was a thread on this list (or maybe on suse-linux-e) which discussed how to loopmount iso files existing on the hard disk and then bootup using the first CD (can't be avoided, I'm sure...). Just dig up the archives.
2005/8/20, Shriramana Sharma
IIRC there was a thread on this list (or maybe on suse-linux-e) which discussed how to loopmount iso files existing on the hard disk and then bootup using the first CD (can't be avoided, I'm sure...).
Just dig up the archives.
Ok - you were right. A thread named "Install from HD?" started at August 12. was about this. Novell's article (which was good) was about how to prepare installation directory for a working installation (so that you don't have to switch cd's when you add/remove software into/from it), but after that Druid wrote that same is possible also for fresh installations: "...Install minimum from cd1 and then after installation set the others as local source, with loopback mounted ISOs...". I think I try to do minimal installation and then mount rest iso's same way as in Novell's article. thanks, Jukka
On 8/20/05, Jukka
ISOs...". I think I try to do minimal installation and then mount rest iso's same way as in Novell's article.
thanks,
Glad to have been of help. Do tell us whether it went through successfully or not.
2005/8/20, Shriramana Sharma
Glad to have been of help. Do tell us whether it went through successfully or not.
It went quite ok ! I choosed "minimal graphical environment" (no KDE/Gnome) during the installation, but it needed also cd's 2 and 3 (if I remember correctly). I skipped them (windowmaker and some other packages was left out) but it seemed not to cause any problems. After this installation continued as described in Novell's article -> I placed iso-images into own folders (copied all 5 images from another partition), created mount-directories under root-directory, mounted iso-images and configured new installation sources with YaST. Only real problem I had was _after_ installation, because beta2 did not create an appropriate grub configuration (booting Suse 9.3 caused a kernel panic). I repaired it with Suse 9.3 disks, using YaST's "repair installation". Jukka Ps.
On Sat, Aug 20, 2005 at 06:05:53PM +0300, Jukka wrote:
2005/8/20, Shriramana Sharma
: [snip] Glad to have been of help. Do tell us whether it went through successfully or not.
It went quite ok !
I choosed "minimal graphical environment" (no KDE/Gnome) during the installation, but it needed also cd's 2 and 3 (if I remember correctly). I skipped them (windowmaker and some other packages was left out) but it seemed not to cause any problems.
What are the packages and would it be possible to have a choice to explude these packages. That way you would ahve a default 1CD instalation. What file contains the information on default install, minimal graphical install and such? Are these /media/cdrom/suse/setup/descr/* ? If so, wich one is the "minimal graphical environment" Then you would need only to add this option and see that no other CD's would be needed for a 1CD instalation. Not too much work and if you have a (semi) working system, you can just add Even better would be to have some KDE as well on CD1, but that would probably need placing a lot of packages on another CD and probably only English. Prehaps something for 10.1. Adding a 1 CD option should be possible, I think and should not be too difficult. houghi -- "Yeah, but you're taking the universe out of context."
Hi All, Here is an other stupid idea, from the previous thread: Is it possible to do an install via internet? I mean to download a single cd and install the rest by ftp, as I can do in debian.. Thx, if you have solution! Best regards, Zolix szombat 20 augusztus 2005 09.51 dátummal Jukka ezt írta:
Hi!
Is it possible to install beta2 without burning iso-images into cd's? What are the right steps to do it (where I put iso-images and how I start the installation)? I have Suse 9.3 installed already and I want to install beta on side of it in a another partition (15 Gb).
-Jukka
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-help@opensuse.org
On 8/20/05, Zoltan Siposs
Is it possible to do an install via internet? I mean to download a single cd and install the rest by ftp, as I can do in debian..
Um, SuSE 9.3 had an option like that, where you downloaded a minimal package which then pulled everything from the net. For example: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/9.3/iso/9.3-x86-64-Network-Installation.iso would work. If you find a similar file on the openSUSE folders, then you've got it. (Tell us, since I haven't searched for it by myself...)
Great! Thanks for the hint, I will lookup the package! Zolix szombat 20 augusztus 2005 10.56 dátummal Shriramana Sharma ezt írta:
Um, SuSE 9.3 had an option like that, where you downloaded a minimal package which then pulled everything from the net. For example: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/9.3/iso/9.3-x86-64-Network-Installat ion.iso would work. If you find a similar file on the openSUSE folders, then you've got it. (Tell us, since I haven't searched for it by myself...)
On Saturday 20 August 2005 10:56, Shriramana Sharma wrote:
On 8/20/05, Zoltan Siposs
wrote: Is it possible to do an install via internet? I mean to download a single cd and install the rest by ftp, as I can do in debian..
Um, SuSE 9.3 had an option like that, where you downloaded a minimal package which then pulled everything from the net. For example: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/9.3/iso/9.3-x86-64-Network-Installation.is o would work. If you find a similar file on the openSUSE folders, then you've got it. (Tell us, since I haven't searched for it by myself...)
There's a boot.iso file under <any-suse-mirror>/inst-source/boot that can be used to start a network install. I installed beta1 via network install and it worked just fine. The suse 9.3 network install iso does not work AFAIK. At least I had all kinds of weird errors with it, e.g. it couldn't find my harddrives etc. Bjorge
On Sat, Aug 20, 2005 at 12:31:16PM +0200, Bjorge Dijkstra wrote: <snip>
ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/9.3/iso/9.3-x86-64-Network-Installation.is <snip> There's a boot.iso file under <any-suse-mirror>/inst-source/boot that can be used to start a network install.
9.3-x86-64-Network-Installation.iso is a symlink to boot.iso So you are talking about the same, identical iso. houghi -- Forms follow function, and often obliterate it.
On Saturday 20 August 2005 14:27, houghi wrote:
There's a boot.iso file under <any-suse-mirror>/inst-source/boot that can be used to start a network install.
9.3-x86-64-Network-Installation.iso is a symlink to boot.iso
So you are talking about the same, identical iso.
houghi
I meant the boot.iso of the 10.0 betas, which is different from the 9.3 one. But for the 9.3 tree you are correct. Bjorge
Bjorge Dijkstra wrote:
The suse 9.3 network install iso does not work AFAIK.
Uh, it works fine here. No probs whatsoever. /Per Jessen, Zürich -- http://www.spamchek.com/freetrial - managed anti-spam and anti-virus solution. Sign up for your free 30-day trial now!
Hi, On Sun, 21 Aug 2005, Per Jessen wrote:
Bjorge Dijkstra wrote:
The suse 9.3 network install iso does not work AFAIK.
Uh, it works fine here. No probs whatsoever.
It is not usable with the 10.0 tree. .../opensuse/distribution/SL-10.0-OSS-beta2/inst-source/CD1/boot/boot.iso is the right "net install" boot image. But CD1 is usable for net installation too. Simply start with "manual=1" at the boot prompt, load your modules by hand, and you have all the installation source choices. Or boot just into the normal installation and cancel it. Then you will fall back to a point where you can proceed just like with "manual=1", but all the needed drivers without the network card module are already present. Load your network module, and voila. Cheers -e -- Eberhard Moenkeberg (emoenke@gwdg.de, em@kki.org)
Eberhard Moenkeberg wrote:
It is not usable with the 10.0 tree.
Ah, I hadn't considered that angle. I was of course talking about a normal/clean 9.3 install.
.../opensuse/distribution/SL-10.0-OSS-beta2/inst-source/CD1/boot/boot.iso is the right "net install" boot image.
But CD1 is usable for net installation too. Simply start with "manual=1" at the boot prompt, load your modules by hand, and you have all the installation source choices.
That's interesting. Thanks for mentioning that. /Per Jessen, Zürich
On Sunday 21 August 2005 19:23, Eberhard Moenkeberg wrote:
But CD1 is usable for net installation too. Simply start with "manual=1" at the boot prompt, load your modules by hand, and you have all the installation source choices.
Or boot just into the normal installation and cancel it. Then you will fall back to a point where you can proceed just like with "manual=1", but all the needed drivers without the network card module are already present. Load your network module, and voila.
There's usually no need for workarounds or hacks like this. On Friday I installed 10.0 from a network source multiple times by simply booting from CD 1, pressing the F key for 'other options', selecting 'ftp', entering my ftp server's IP and the directory, and it was done. All modules were autodetected
Hi, On Sun, 21 Aug 2005, Anders Johansson wrote:
On Sunday 21 August 2005 19:23, Eberhard Moenkeberg wrote:
But CD1 is usable for net installation too. Simply start with "manual=1" at the boot prompt, load your modules by hand, and you have all the installation source choices.
Or boot just into the normal installation and cancel it. Then you will fall back to a point where you can proceed just like with "manual=1", but all the needed drivers without the network card module are already present. Load your network module, and voila.
There's usually no need for workarounds or hacks like this. On Friday I installed 10.0 from a network source multiple times by simply booting from CD 1, pressing the F key for 'other options', selecting 'ftp', entering my ftp server's IP and the directory, and it was done. All modules were autodetected
At least formerly you had no choice to enter your IP number this way. It needed a DHCP server. Is this fixed now? Cheers -e -- Eberhard Moenkeberg (emoenke@gwdg.de, em@kki.org)
On Sunday 21 August 2005 22:24, Eberhard Moenkeberg wrote:
At least formerly you had no choice to enter your IP number this way. It needed a DHCP server. Is this fixed now?
At least since SLES8 you have had the possibility to gove a boot option to linuxrc "ip=x.x.x.x netmask=y.y.y.y gw=z.z.z.z" if you don't have dhcp. In 9.3 and 10.0 you get a question if you want to use dhcp, and if you say no you get a popup where you can enter your details (although since I use dhcp I haven't tried to see if it works or not)
Hi, On Sun, 21 Aug 2005, Anders Johansson wrote:
On Sunday 21 August 2005 22:24, Eberhard Moenkeberg wrote:
At least formerly you had no choice to enter your IP number this way. It needed a DHCP server. Is this fixed now?
At least since SLES8 you have had the possibility to gove a boot option to linuxrc "ip=x.x.x.x netmask=y.y.y.y gw=z.z.z.z" if you don't have dhcp. In 9.3 and 10.0 you get a question if you want to use dhcp, and if you say no you get a popup where you can enter your details (although since I use dhcp I haven't tried to see if it works or not)
So I can hope that it is fixed now. But I bet it needs some more betas before I will leave my "traditional" way... Cheers -e -- Eberhard Moenkeberg (emoenke@gwdg.de, em@kki.org)
On Sun, Aug 21, 2005 at 10:36:16PM +0200, Eberhard Moenkeberg wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, 21 Aug 2005, Anders Johansson wrote:
On Sunday 21 August 2005 22:24, Eberhard Moenkeberg wrote:
At least formerly you had no choice to enter your IP number this way. It needed a DHCP server. Is this fixed now?
At least since SLES8 you have had the possibility to gove a boot option to linuxrc "ip=x.x.x.x netmask=y.y.y.y gw=z.z.z.z" if you don't have dhcp. In 9.3 and 10.0 you get a question if you want to use dhcp, and if you say no you get a popup where you can enter your details (although since I use dhcp I haven't tried to see if it works or not)
So I can hope that it is fixed now. But I bet it needs some more betas before I will leave my "traditional" way...
manual=1 will start linuxrc. You can specify almost everything on the kernel cmdline. Check linuxrc.html in the linuxrc package. Ciao, Marcus
Hi, On Sun, 21 Aug 2005, Marcus Meissner wrote:
On Sun, Aug 21, 2005 at 10:36:16PM +0200, Eberhard Moenkeberg wrote:
On Sun, 21 Aug 2005, Anders Johansson wrote:
On Sunday 21 August 2005 22:24, Eberhard Moenkeberg wrote:
At least formerly you had no choice to enter your IP number this way. It needed a DHCP server. Is this fixed now?
At least since SLES8 you have had the possibility to gove a boot option to linuxrc "ip=x.x.x.x netmask=y.y.y.y gw=z.z.z.z" if you don't have dhcp. In 9.3 and 10.0 you get a question if you want to use dhcp, and if you say no you get a popup where you can enter your details (although since I use dhcp I haven't tried to see if it works or not)
So I can hope that it is fixed now. But I bet it needs some more betas before I will leave my "traditional" way...
manual=1 will start linuxrc.
You can specify almost everything on the kernel cmdline. Check linuxrc.html in the linuxrc package.
Yes, but this was explicitely not my goal. I prefer the immanent method at the later stage. "manual=1", nothing more - not fiddling the cryptic way with linuxrc's syntax, but simply using the manual way. Cheers -e -- Eberhard Moenkeberg (emoenke@gwdg.de, em@kki.org)
On Sunday 21 August 2005 22:36, Eberhard Moenkeberg wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, 21 Aug 2005, Anders Johansson wrote:
On Sunday 21 August 2005 22:24, Eberhard Moenkeberg wrote:
At least formerly you had no choice to enter your IP number this way. It needed a DHCP server. Is this fixed now?
At least since SLES8 you have had the possibility to gove a boot option to linuxrc "ip=x.x.x.x netmask=y.y.y.y gw=z.z.z.z" if you don't have dhcp. In 9.3 and 10.0 you get a question if you want to use dhcp, and if you say no you get a popup where you can enter your details (although since I use dhcp I haven't tried to see if it works or not)
So I can hope that it is fixed now. But I bet it needs some more betas before I will leave my "traditional" way...
Slight mistake, it's hostip and gateway, not ip and gw. But this has been around for some time (don't know exactly how long, but at least since 8.1) so it should be fairly well tested by now
Hi, On Sun, 21 Aug 2005, Anders Johansson wrote:
On Sunday 21 August 2005 22:36, Eberhard Moenkeberg wrote:
On Sun, 21 Aug 2005, Anders Johansson wrote:
On Sunday 21 August 2005 22:24, Eberhard Moenkeberg wrote:
At least formerly you had no choice to enter your IP number this way. It needed a DHCP server. Is this fixed now?
At least since SLES8 you have had the possibility to gove a boot option to linuxrc "ip=x.x.x.x netmask=y.y.y.y gw=z.z.z.z" if you don't have dhcp. In 9.3 and 10.0 you get a question if you want to use dhcp, and if you say no you get a popup where you can enter your details (although since I use dhcp I haven't tried to see if it works or not)
So I can hope that it is fixed now. But I bet it needs some more betas before I will leave my "traditional" way...
Slight mistake, it's hostip and gateway, not ip and gw. But this has been around for some time (don't know exactly how long, but at least since 8.1) so it should be fairly well tested by now
"My" way is smoother, without fiddling with these cryptic params and running totally into the shit each time for every single typo or wrong keyword... Cheers -e -- Eberhard Moenkeberg (emoenke@gwdg.de, em@kki.org)
Hi, On Sun, 21 Aug 2005, Siegmar Alber wrote:
Am Sonntag, 21. August 2005 19:23 schrieb Eberhard Moenkeberg:
Load your network module, and voila.
Are there also modules for WLAN-Cards (e.g. Netgear WG311)?
Not during installation - I guess not even those which are part of the default kernel... After installation, the "pure GPL" modules are available (even Ralink, which is not part of the kernel!), but for those with proprietary parts (like Centrino and Atheros) you need to use /pub/suse/i386/10.0/SUSE-Linux10.0-Beta2-Extra/ as a second installation source (or "rpm -Uhv" the relevant kernel packages below). Cheers -e -- Eberhard Moenkeberg (emoenke@gwdg.de, em@kki.org)
On Saturday August 20,2005 1:56 am, Shriramana Sharma wrote:
On 8/20/05, Zoltan Siposs
wrote: Is it possible to do an install via internet? I mean to download a single cd and install the rest by ftp, as I can do in debian..
Um, SuSE 9.3 had an option like that, where you downloaded a minimal package which then pulled everything from the net. For example: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/9.3/iso/9.3-x86-64-Network-Installation.is o would work. If you find a similar file on the openSUSE folders, then you've got it. (Tell us, since I haven't searched for it by myself...)
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-help@opensuse.org
In that regard, as I was just recently attempting this: how do I determine the DNS numbers from a website. The network install program wants these and I only had the domain name. I hope I am using correct terms here: I knew I could use "mirrors.kernel.org..." for example, but did not know how to get its 4 dotted DNS numbers. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction. Richard
Richard wrote:
In that regard, as I was just recently attempting this: how do I determine the DNS numbers from a website. The network install program wants these and I only had the domain name. I hope I am using correct terms here: I knew I could use "mirrors.kernel.org..." for example, but did not know how to get its 4 dotted DNS numbers. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction.
You probably meant to say "its IP address". To lookup a hostname: dig <hostname>, e.g. "dig mirror.kernel.org". /Per Jessen, Zürich
On Sun, Aug 21, 2005 at 09:53:27PM -0700, Richard wrote:
In that regard, as I was just recently attempting this: how do I determine the DNS numbers from a website. The network install program wants these and I only had the domain name. I hope I am using correct terms here: I knew I could use "mirrors.kernel.org..." for example, but did not know how to get its 4 dotted DNS numbers. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction. Richard
If you do the connection via DHCP, you can just use the name, like ftp.example.com. If that is not the case, you must look for the IP adress before you do the connection. Open a terminal and do `ping ftp.example.com` That wil,l give you the adress. It is not the official way, but it will give you the IP in (almost?) any OS. houghi -- "He's the kind of man for the times that need the kind of man he is ..."
Open a terminal and do `ping ftp.example.com` That wil,l give you the adress.
You can also use: http://www.dnsstuff.com/tools/lookup.ch?name=ftp.suse.com http://www.dnsstuff.com/tools/lookup.ch?name=mirrors.kernel.org Which will give you a result independent of the upstream DNS server you are using. or if you have no DNS on a network http://66.36.247.82/tools/lookup.ch?name=ftp.suse.com
participants (12)
-
Anders Johansson
-
Bjorge Dijkstra
-
Eberhard Moenkeberg
-
houghi
-
Jukka
-
Marcus Meissner
-
Per Jessen
-
Peter Flodin
-
Richard
-
Shriramana Sharma
-
Siegmar Alber
-
Zoltan Siposs