Luis Villa (liv@duke.edu)
Sun, 25 Apr 1999 21:29:42 -0400 (EDT)
On Sun, 25 Apr 1999, Dan Burcaw wrote:
>
> > 1) Is FTP install supposed to work, or is it still extremely beta? If it's
> > beta, I provide these as a bug report, if not, well, I hope someone can
> > help me out. At this point, this is only a summary- I'll post details when
> > I have access to my friend's machine again. He's got a paper due tomorrow
> > :-)
>
> I've done several FTP installs...and I know others have too.
That's great- I hope I will soon too. However, since the manual says there
is no FTP install yet, I wasn't sure if what I was running into was
beta-style problems with the program itself or problems on my end. If
others have done them, I guess maybe it's my problem, or something B&W
specific as you suggest.
>
> Interesting.. I wonder if these errors are B&W specific.. I'll try ftp
> install on o ur B&W.
>
Any luck? Or is it just me?
> > but the install program does not recognize it as a yellowdog disc. Should
> > the disc have a specific title? Or is there another trick to it?
>
> It has to be in ISO9660 format w/ Rock Ridge Extensions.
It is. I'm curious- I notice that when my friend burned the disc, he put
everything in /RedHat, /install, /... Should they be in
/mnt/yellowdog/RedHat, /mnt/yellowdog/install, etc.? I had assumed that
the /mnt/yellowdog/ notation in the README file indicated where the
install program would look for it once mounted, but I might be wrong.
> We haven't made
> an image available due to space limitations with our mirror sites.. If a
> third party makes a image that works (using mkisofs or mkhybrid) we'll
> place a link to it from the web page and in a README file on the ftp
> sites.
Understandable. Let us know. :)
On Sun, 25 Apr 1999, Ben Karas wrote:
>
> >If it does get past that stage, it goes fine through to package selection.
> >After that, there is an obscure error related to "line 107" (don't
recall
> >the name of the file- I'll find it later).
>
> These errors occured because the version numbers changed. I might not have
> listed all the rpms because I didn't install "Everything". Best method
is
> to copy down the names as you get the errors.
>
I was getting the errors on every single file, not just the X files.
They started with base-xxx.noarch.rpm on. My friend is still working
on his paper, so I have not yat made an attempt with the updated hdlist yet.
>
> If you have the hard drive space, a 2.2.x kernel should be able to access
> HFS partitions and therefore you could save the RPMS, base, and instimage
> inside a "RedHat" folder on your hard drive. This solves the RPM issue,
> but takes up 382MB of space.
>
I don't have the space, but the friend who I'm helping install has all the
space in the world. If FTP doesn't work next time around, I'll try this.
Do the 2.2.x's on the ftp.yellowdoglinux.com site have HFS support
compiled in?
On Sun, 25 Apr 1999, Dan Burcaw wrote:
>
> > Thanks for pointing out the utempter thing.. this is fixed in the 'comps'
> > file now.
>
> Actually it was right in the comps file. I bet this person didn't download
> that file.
>
I didn't know I was supposed to d/l the file, nor can I find any mention
(in either the yellow dog or red hat docs) of any time in the process
where the file should be downloaded. If it is downloaded automatically,
which is what I'm assuming, then... well, I should have gotten far enough
to d/l it, since I did get all the way through the package selection
process. Is there some place I should d/l it?
Anyway, thanks again for any feedback- hope I can test these details
soon...
Luis
#######################################################################
"They call the faithful to their knees
to hear the softly spoken magic spell:"
"There's no place like home...
There's no place like home...
There's no place like home."
-Pink Floyd, Dark Side of the Moon
-Dorothy, The Wizard of Oz
#######################################################################
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Fri Apr 30 1999 - 11:30:17 MDT