SuSE 10.1 Remastered Broke
I attempted an installation from the 5 CD version of SuSE 10.1 Remastered, released a couple of weeks back. It couldn't get a file it needed on CD1 (gettext), I told it to retry, nota, ignore, hoping it would continue, nope, it droped into the text screen to report we had an error, yeh, we tried installing SuSE 10.1 Remastered. Only thing I could do at this point was restart the installation. Not going there today :-( Already, the install had cost me an hour, lost! Hope 10.2, when finally released, is a little more friendly. It was my understanding that one reason 10.1 was remaster was to fix the installer? FYI, I run the original 10.1 on a machine at home, it is my main computer, and other than the updater issues which have been fixed and I was able to work around without any great concern but it really bothers me that things like this continue to occur with the installer. Oh, it was a fresh install as well, media verified.
On Wednesday 08 November 2006 19:56, Clint Tinsley wrote:
I attempted an installation from the 5 CD version of SuSE 10.1 Remastered, released a couple of weeks back. It couldn't get a file it needed on CD1 (gettext), I told it to retry, nota, ignore, hoping it would continue, nope, it droped into the text screen to report we had an error, yeh, we tried installing SuSE 10.1 Remastered.
Did you check the media at all before trying the install?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Wednesday 2006-11-08 at 12:56 -0700, Clint Tinsley wrote:
I attempted an installation from the 5 CD version of SuSE 10.1 Remastered, released a couple of weeks back. It couldn't get a file it
Did you verify the checksums of the downloaded images, and after burning them, of the CDs? FYI, I did an install from the dvd and it run fine. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFFUjqqtTMYHG2NR9URAi1hAKCVDIpJ0szvoeCItqAScmTgwBqNTQCcDzZT ZWvGWANPLP2b1WcA2ZJ5V8Q= =ZMDG -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
The Wednesday 2006-11-08 at 12:56 -0700, Clint Tinsley wrote:
I attempted an installation from the 5 CD version of SuSE 10.1 Remastered, released a couple of weeks back. It couldn't get a file it
Did you verify the checksums of the downloaded images, and after burning them, of the CDs?
FYI, I did an install from the dvd and it run fine.
- -- Cheers, Carlos E. R.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76
iD8DBQFFUjqqtTMYHG2NR9URAi1hAKCVDIpJ0szvoeCItqAScmTgwBqNTQCcDzZT ZWvGWANPLP2b1WcA2ZJ5V8Q= =ZMDG -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Hi I also have installed from the DVD, and no problem here, I had the same problem with a suse 10.1, but once I re download it it ran fine Jose
On Wednesday 08 November 2006 20:56, Clint Tinsley wrote:
I attempted an installation from the 5 CD version of SuSE 10.1 Remastered, released a couple of weeks back. It couldn't get a file it needed on CD1 (gettext), I told it to retry, nota, ignore, hoping it would continue,
It can't continue if it can't read packages off the disc. It sounds like you had a read error, for whatever reason (bad ISO image, bad burn, incompatibilities between burner and reader or something else) There is an option at the start of the installer to verify your discs.
On 11/8/06, Clint Tinsley <clintin@linuxmail.org> wrote:
I attempted an installation from the 5 CD version of SuSE 10.1 Remastered, released a couple of weeks back. It couldn't get a file it needed on CD1 (gettext), I told it to retry, nota, ignore, hoping it would continue, nope, it droped into the text screen to report we had an error, yeh, we tried installing SuSE 10.1 Remastered. Only thing I could do at this point was restart the installation. Not going there today :-( Already, the install had cost me an hour, lost! Hope 10.2, when finally released, is a little more friendly. It was my understanding that one reason 10.1 was remaster was to fix the installer? FYI, I run the original 10.1 on a machine at home, it is my main computer, and other than the updater issues which have been fixed and I was able to work around without any great concern but it really bothers me that things like this continue to occur with the installer. Oh, it was a fresh install as well, media verified.
You should call your local Microsoft rep and complain about it.** Sorry guys, I am not trying to troll, but you all saw this one coming up 5th avenue with a big neon sign on it. -- jjgitties, "*We* need to convince OpenSUSE to fork, or let 'em die. To bad, it is a wonderful Distro. But their parent company is NOT our friend."
On Wed, 2006-11-08 at 16:00 -0500, JJ Gitties wrote: jjgitties, "*We* need to convince OpenSUSE to fork, or let 'em die. To bad, it is a wonderful Distro. But their parent company is NOT our friend." Why is M$ following me wherever I go.... Will it be M$ beers next ? Sounds like hell, I'm not ready for that and didn't plan to end up there either. I'm pretty sure off Suse distro soon... It has been nice to "pass bye"... -- /Cheers Peo -- Registered Linux User #432116, get counted at http://counter.li.org www.whylinuxisbetter.net -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Wednesday 08 November 2006 22:00, JJ Gitties wrote:
Sorry guys, I am not trying to troll, but you all saw this one coming up 5th avenue with a big neon sign on it.
Not really. And your sig about forking is also just another sign that you're a troll with no mind of your own
Anders. I resent that. My new sig is proudly plagarized from a user who commented on the recent Dvorak article that I read today. It may be that both of them have no clue what they are talking about, but I liked the comment and it make me chuckle. http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2052320,00.asp and the user was * rickst29* and his comment was here near the bottom... http://discuss.pcmag.com/forums/1004349517/ShowPost.aspx I will be paying *rickst29 *and he will be paying me royalties for this bit of IP. :-) On 11/8/06, Anders Johansson <andjoh@rydsbo.net> wrote:
On Wednesday 08 November 2006 22:00, JJ Gitties wrote:
Sorry guys, I am not trying to troll, but you all saw this one coming up 5th avenue with a big neon sign on it.
Not really. And your sig about forking is also just another sign that you're a troll with no mind of your own
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
-- jjgitties, "*We* need to convince OpenSUSE to fork, or let 'em die. To bad, it is a wonderful Distro. But their parent company is NOT our friend."
On Wednesday 08 November 2006 22:29, JJ Gitties wrote:
Anders. I resent that. My new sig is proudly plagarized from a user who commented on the recent Dvorak article that I read today. It may be that both of them have no clue what they are talking about, but I liked the comment and it make me chuckle.
It's so comic that the community - so quick to condemn FUD in others - are really the worst FUD makers.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2052320,00.asp
and the user was * rickst29* and his comment was here near the bottom...
http://discuss.pcmag.com/forums/1004349517/ShowPost.aspx
I will be paying *rickst29 *and he will be paying me royalties for this bit of IP.
Funny. But if you had taken the trouble to read things for yourself - as opposed to just repeating ill-informed things from others - you would have known that no one is paying anyone IP royalties If - and it's a huge if - there is ever anything found that violates a patent in GPLed code, no one has a license to use it. The code will be rewritten or pulled. What's being paid for is not having to go to court for someone else's mistake The FUD about patent problems in linux was spread by others (notably the OSRM). Novell's stand is that there are no patent problems in GPL code, but customers aren't satisfied that easily
On 11/8/06, Anders Johansson <andjoh@rydsbo.net> wrote:
It's so comic that the community - so quick to condemn FUD in others - are really the worst FUD makers.
Well, FUD can flows both ways. <snipped>
Funny. But if you had taken the trouble to read things for yourself - as opposed to just repeating ill-informed things from others -
I did read all of it. And I did not include the guys post because I believe it's true, I just thought it was funny and exercise my right to use it in my sig. Personally, my stand on this is, it's way too soon to tell what will come out of it. But that does not stop one from having a sense of humor about the whole thing. MS went to the stables to butcher Netscape only to have the poor bugger came back and bite them in the arse in the form of community Firefox. The long running joke of http://www.mslinux.org/ is about to be real. Come on, pull the pickle, you got to laugh about it. -- jjgitties, "*We* need to convince OpenSUSE to fork, or let 'em die. To bad, it is a wonderful Distro. But their parent company is NOT our friend."
participants (7)
-
Anders Johansson -
Carlos E. R. -
Clint Tinsley -
Dylan -
JJ Gitties -
Jose -
Peo Nilsson