10.1 Beta Installation Trouble and experience
This time I've had serious trouble before I succeeded to install 10.1 beta2 on my multiboot K7 (3 Linux installations and Win2k), finally from burned CDs. At first, even not actually a problem, but easy to oversee what happends. What is the idea behind the change of the Yast2 partitioning that now by default try to split the last disk partition in two? I wished as for previous 10.0 to install 10.1 beta in one root partition on the same /dev/hda12. But now at each installation attempt, Yast try to remove and split this partition in two smaller partitions /dev/hda12 and /dev/hda13, one for /home and one for root. In my opinion the user should safer do this selection if actual, not Yast by default. I tried a couple of times to upgrade from 10.0 to 10.1 beta1 using the Internet installation, but the downlad speed was slow and the upgrade installation hung after the first reboot, with a corrupted 10.1 installation as a result. But even after downloading the 10.1 beta2 CDs, I've run into installation trouble. There were boot messages like "Kernel panic - not syncing: Fatal exception in interupt" "Fatal error inserting Thermal (........)" "Trans replayed: ....a lot of messages" I installed a standard KDE selection, with no conflicts, but during the later Yast configuring fonts the installation hung and I had to reboot. Trying a normal KDE login there was almost no interactive response, the menus was available but no application started and the system hung. A secure boot and command line login was possible however. As my Internet line wasn't found, I corrected the hostname in /etc/hosts. But in addtitin I had to run a couple of Yast repair installation, which told a minimal installation had to be done. After this I added Gnome and more, and now the 10.1 beta2 installation finally looks to work interactive. I also discoved that Shutdown doesn't Power Off my K7 any more. Is this a bug in 10.1 beta2 or? As beta3 now is released I tried Yast2 Online Update, but no update was found (only an error message). Therefore I wonder if there isn't any Online Update possibility from beta2 to beta3, without the need to download and burn the full five new CDs and do an Upgrade installation? Rgds, Terje J. Hanssen
Hi, On Sat, 4 Feb 2006, Terje J. Hanssen wrote:
As beta3 now is released I tried Yast2 Online Update, but no update was found (only an error message).
Therefore I wonder if there isn't any Online Update possibility from beta2 to beta3, without the need to download and burn the full five new CDs and do an Upgrade installation?
YaST2 -> Software -> System Update not Online Update. Cheers -e -- Eberhard Moenkeberg (emoenke@gwdg.de, em@kki.org)
Eberhard Moenkeberg <emoenke@gwdg.de> wrote:
On Sat, 4 Feb 2006, Terje J. Hanssen wrote:
/> As beta3 now is released I tried Yast2 Online Update, but no update was found / /> (only an error message). / /> / /> Therefore I wonder if there isn't any Online Update possibility from beta2 to / /> beta3, without the need to download and burn the full five new CDs and do an / /> Upgrade installation? /
YaST2 -> Software -> System Update
not Online Update.
Without downloading and burning the 10.1 beta3 CDs first; possibly how? System Update shows only the current version no 10.0.42 and no packages to update. Should some installation source url to 10.1 beta3 be applied? Terje
Hi, On Sat, 4 Feb 2006, Terje J. Hanssen wrote:
Eberhard Moenkeberg <emoenke@gwdg.de> wrote:
On Sat, 4 Feb 2006, Terje J. Hanssen wrote:
/> As beta3 now is released I tried Yast2 Online Update, but no update was found / /> (only an error message). / /> / /> Therefore I wonder if there isn't any Online Update possibility from beta2 to / /> beta3, without the need to download and burn the full five new CDs and do an / /> Upgrade installation? /
YaST2 -> Software -> System Update
not Online Update.
Without downloading and burning the 10.1 beta3 CDs first; possibly how?
System Update shows only the current version no 10.0.42 and no packages to update. Should some installation source url to 10.1 beta3 be applied?
Exactly. You have to configure the 10.1b3 installation source before. Cheers -e -- Eberhard Moenkeberg (emoenke@gwdg.de, em@kki.org)
On Sat, Feb 04, 2006 at 03:36:41PM +0100, Terje J. Hanssen wrote:
At first, even not actually a problem, but easy to oversee what happends. What is the idea behind the change of the Yast2 partitioning that now by default try to split the last disk partition in two? I wished as for previous 10.0 to install 10.1 beta in one root partition on the same /dev/hda12. But now at each installation attempt, Yast try to remove and split this partition in two smaller partitions /dev/hda12 and /dev/hda13, one for /home and one for root. In my opinion the user should safer do this selection if actual, not Yast by default.
The idea is that first time users get a /home partition. The advatage of a /home partition is that if you do a new installation with 10.2 or later, your home partition will not be removed. On the fact that it uses the last drive by default: I can see two ways of thinking here. If you DO it by default, you risk that the user looses data on that drive that is important. If you DON'T do it, then the user might not be able to install. Changes for the intermediate user are very easy to do (and on the lighter side: it shows the beginner that messages on a Linux machine ARE importand and klicking OK by default is not always a good thing. ;-) houghi -- You better believe that marijuana can cause castration. Just suppose your girlfriend gets the munchies!
Hi All A little off target but this may add a little clarity. Playing around with different distributions I installed Asianux on one of my test boxes the other day. Now I will not say anything bad about program content it appeared to be excellent for a 2 disk distribution or screen graphics background et.; they also appeared to be excellent. Whit I will comment on [and I repeated the installation because I thought I made a mistake] is that there was no home user defined. After installation I had to log in as root. Apparently this is how quite a few are running the distribution. I was able to ascertain that there was a user not defined by me. I was not able to log into this user not knowing the password. I then searched very diligently through all the GUI based programs for one that allowed me as root to add / substract users. I could find none. Since my two test installations were a week apart and I spent a couple of hours on this each time I am fairly sure that I got a good surface feeling for the distribution and my response is: Thanks but no thanks. I know the issues I mentioned above are trivial to fix. My question is why? Why should I pass my time fixing a distribution that provides so little security that everything is dumped into one partition and one has to log in as root? Thus I currently have 2 nice disks containing Asianux that would be useful as sleets, Frisbees, mirror reflectors et but not as devices to retain programs in MY computer. SOTL
SOTL wrote:
Hi All
A little off target but this may add a little clarity.
Playing around with different distributions I installed Asianux on one of my test boxes the other day.
Now I will not say anything bad about program content it appeared to be excellent for a 2 disk distribution or screen graphics background et.; they also appeared to be excellent.
Whit I will comment on [and I repeated the installation because I thought I made a mistake] is that there was no home user defined. After installation I had to log in as root. Apparently this is how quite a few are running the distribution. I was able to ascertain that there was a user not defined by me. I was not able to log into this user not knowing the password. I then searched very diligently through all the GUI based programs for one that allowed me as root to add / substract users. I could find none. Since my two test installations were a week apart and I spent a couple of hours on this each time I am fairly sure that I got a good surface feeling for the distribution and my response is:
Thanks but no thanks. I know the issues I mentioned above are trivial to fix. My question is why? Why should I pass my time fixing a distribution that provides so little security that everything is dumped into one partition and one has to log in as root? Thus I currently have 2 nice disks containing Asianux that would be useful as sleets, Frisbees, mirror reflectors et but not as devices to retain programs in MY computer.
SOTL
And why exactly are you ranting about this on this list?
On Sunday 05 February 2006 10:49 am, Jan Karjalainen wrote:
SOTL wrote:
Hi All
A little off target but this may add a little clarity.
Playing around with different distributions I installed Asianux on one of my test boxes the other day.
Now I will not say anything bad about program content it appeared to be excellent for a 2 disk distribution or screen graphics background et.; they also appeared to be excellent.
Whit I will comment on [and I repeated the installation because I thought I made a mistake] is that there was no home user defined. After installation I had to log in as root. Apparently this is how quite a few are running the distribution. I was able to ascertain that there was a user not defined by me. I was not able to log into this user not knowing the password. I then searched very diligently through all the GUI based programs for one that allowed me as root to add / substract users. I could find none. Since my two test installations were a week apart and I spent a couple of hours on this each time I am fairly sure that I got a good surface feeling for the distribution and my response is:
Thanks but no thanks. I know the issues I mentioned above are trivial to fix. My question is why? Why should I pass my time fixing a distribution that provides so little security that everything is dumped into one partition and one has to log in as root? Thus I currently have 2 nice disks containing Asianux that would be useful as sleets, Frisbees, mirror reflectors et but not as devices to retain programs in MY computer.
SOTL
And why exactly are you ranting about this on this list?
Who is ranking? The issue was that that the original poster could not understand what security was all about. I simply gave an example of what it should not be. SOTL
houghi <houghi@houghi.org> wrote:
On Sat, Feb 04, 2006 at 03:36:41PM +0100, Terje J. Hanssen wrote:
At first, even not actually a problem, but easy to oversee what happends. What is the idea behind the change of the Yast2 partitioning that now by default try to split the last disk partition in two? I wished as for previous 10.0 to install 10.1 beta in one root partition on the same /dev/hda12. But now at each installation attempt, Yast try to remove and split this partition in two smaller partitions /dev/hda12 and /dev/hda13, one for /home and one for root. In my opinion the user should safer do this selection if actual, not Yast by default.
The idea is that first time users get a /home partition. The advatage of a /home partition is that if you do a new installation with 10.2 or later, your home partition will not be removed.
Maybe, maybe not. Next time at a 10.2 New installation (not Upgrade), won't Yast try to do the same, delete and split the last partition also then? As long as the last partition also is reformatted, everything on that partition will be wiped out. I still think it was better as previously, that Yast asked where to install the new Linux distro or version, when it discovered previous installed root (Reiser) file systems.
On the fact that it uses the last drive by default: I can see two ways of thinking here. If you DO it by default, you risk that the user looses data on that drive that is important. If you DON'T do it, then the user might not be able to install.
To mentione, I keep my important user data on a FAT file system for common access (e.g. my Mozilla mail box) regardless of Linux distro or Win2k booted. Terje
On Sat, Feb 04, 2006 at 06:14:50PM +0100, Terje J. Hanssen wrote:
The idea is that first time users get a /home partition. The advatage of a /home partition is that if you do a new installation with 10.2 or later, your home partition will not be removed.
Maybe, maybe not. Next time at a 10.2 New installation (not Upgrade), won't Yast try to do the same, delete and split the last partition also then? As long as the last partition also is reformatted, everything on that partition will be wiped out.
Good point. Is there a way that you can analyze the mountpoints and recognize an existing (SUSE) /home partition so it can us that, although that will bring a LOT of other problems.
I still think it was better as previously, that Yast asked where to install the new Linux distro or version, when it discovered previous installed root (Reiser) file systems.
Ok. So it was more about the partitioning thing then about the /home thing. Even if there would be one partion, the same thing would apply. It si more about the deleting then the splitting.
To mentione, I keep my important user data on a FAT file system for common access (e.g. my Mozilla mail box) regardless of Linux distro or Win2k booted.
No Windows for me. houghi -- Political T.V. commercials prove one thing: some candidates can tell all their good points and qualifications in just 30 seconds.
/Eberhard Moenkeberg <emoenke@gwdg.de> wrote: /
On Sat, 4 Feb 2006, Terje J. Hanssen wrote: /> Eberhard Moenkeberg <emoenke@gwdg.de> wrote: / />> On Sat, 4 Feb 2006, Terje J. Hanssen wrote: /
////.....snip />> /> Therefore I wonder if there isn't any Online Update possibility from / />> beta2 to / / />> /> beta3, without the need to download and burn the full five new CDs and / />> do an / / />> /> Upgrade installation? / / />> / />> YaST2 -> Software -> System Update / />> / />> not Online Update. / /> / /> / /> Without downloading and burning the 10.1 beta3 CDs first; possibly how? / /> / /> System Update shows only the current version no 10.0.42 and no packages to / /> update. / /> Should some installation source url to 10.1 beta3 be applied? /
Exactly. You have to configure the 10.1b3 installation source before.
Sorry, bad experience. Entered the IP address to ftp://ftp.gwdg.de and path to inst-source and run System Update. A lot of package conflicts had to be manually cleaned up, then 2GB packages deleted before the System update started(?) and run online several hours. One popup error message appeared several times: Could not load image yast, detail: icon not found. At the end Yast config and more didn't work. Gnome panel errors and more at login; KDE login was not longer available. After this unsuccessful System Update to beta3(?) over Internet, it looks like I really have to "downgrade" again to 10.1 beta2 using my CDs. Terje
A follow up: Terje J. Hanssen wrote:
Sorry, bad experience. Entered the IP address to ftp://ftp.gwdg.de and path to inst-source and run System Update. A lot of package conflicts had to be manually cleaned up, then 2GB packages deleted before the System update started(?) and run online several hours.
One popup error message appeared several times: Could not load image yast, detail: icon not found. At the end Yast config and more didn't work. Gnome panel errors and more at login; KDE login was not longer available.
After this unsuccessful System Update to beta3(?) over Internet, it looks like I really have to "downgrade" again to 10.1 beta2 using my CDs.
Well, after several hours I'm running 10.1 beta2 again. I had to run both Repair and Upgrade installations (4,57GB) from CDs. It looks like running the Configuration, SuseConfig fonts tends to freeze at 13% finished, and I had to start the Repair again a couple of times before it would continue. And login to KDE, I think the fonts looks very small and bad compared with previous versions. Other exeperiences/suggestions regarding Online update to beta3 and KDE fonts? Terje
participants (5)
-
Eberhard Moenkeberg -
houghi -
Jan Karjalainen -
SOTL -
Terje J. Hanssen