this existed in 4.2 and i hoped it would magically fix itself in 4.3, but no such luck.
if you do a custom install and select the everything package (i'm lazy and don't care if i burn disk space :-), when it gets to cd 4, it will suddenly need disk 1 again to install the comps package and then go back to 4 for the rest of the install. it seems like the comps package would have been installed very early on in the process, so this seems very odd.
i can look at the install log if that would do someone some good.
Joe Pruett wrote:
if you do a custom install and select the everything package (i'm lazy and don't care if i burn disk space :-), when it gets to cd 4, it will suddenly need disk 1 again to install the comps package and then go back to 4 for the rest of the install. it seems like the comps package would have been installed very early on in the process, so this seems very odd.
i can look at the install log if that would do someone some good.
this isnt really a problem, its something thats by design - we want the comps to only be on cd-1 since that way people can run a minimum install only needing cd-1.
depending on the pkgset selected for install, the installer will build a transaction set, comps goes right down the ladder there, to setup an install order. IF you really want everything and dont want to do this switch - how about using the DVD or install over the wire !
this isnt really a problem, its something thats by design - we want the comps to only be on cd-1 since that way people can run a minimum install only needing cd-1.
depending on the pkgset selected for install, the installer will build a transaction set, comps goes right down the ladder there, to setup an install order. IF you really want everything and dont want to do this switch - how about using the DVD or install over the wire !
i don't understand how the rpm dependencies could end up putting comps so far down the list. i just checked for requirements dependencies and nothing seems to show up. doesn't the rpm system under anaconda know what packages are on what disks and build the transaction to cope with that?
i do usually use network installs, but sometimes i'm in the field and don't have that luxury.
On Tue, 2006-05-02 at 22:29 -0700, Joe Pruett wrote:
this isnt really a problem, its something thats by design - we want the comps to only be on cd-1 since that way people can run a minimum install only needing cd-1.
depending on the pkgset selected for install, the installer will build a transaction set, comps goes right down the ladder there, to setup an install order. IF you really want everything and dont want to do this switch - how about using the DVD or install over the wire !
i don't understand how the rpm dependencies could end up putting comps so far down the list. i just checked for requirements dependencies and nothing seems to show up. doesn't the rpm system under anaconda know what packages are on what disks and build the transaction to cope with that?
i do usually use network installs, but sometimes i'm in the field and don't have that luxury.
Where comps is in relation to the install is based on how many different RPMS are installed.
If you have certain things checked (like a minimal install) it all happens from CD-1 ... other installs are CD-1 and CD-2 only ... others require all 4 CDs.
I don't think that having to swap 1 CD back in 1 time is a major problem.
This issue has to do with the fact that CD-1 has been made to contain comps so that a minimal install can happen all from CD-1.
The upstream provider has different CD-1's for each flavor (AS, ES, WS, Desktop, etc.) and their comps is located elsewhere ... if we don't move comps to disc 1 .... then everybody has to have all the other discs they need + disc4. In other words, an install that now requires only CD-1 would need disc1 and disc4 ... and one that currently requires disc1 and disc2 would need disc1 and disc2 and disc4, etc.
The only downside is that some installs will require you to swap disc 1 in the middle of disc 4.
I think that is much preferable to the alternative (since you are already required to have disc 4 in your particular install) ... than to require disc 4 for every install (just for comps), even ones that currently happen from disc 1 only OR from disc 1 and 2 only.
I could be wrong ... however I personally think that not making 2 discs be required for a minimal install is much more convenient (since I quite frequently download or take disc 1 with me to do minimal installs).
here is my confusion. if comps can be installed from a disk 1 only install, then it doesn't rely on anything from disks 2-4. so how can it (and nothing else) get pushed to near the bottom of the list of packages? it gets installed between cdrecord and db4-java. and for some reason it also is listed as being installed a second time at the very end of install.log. it would make more sense to be done off disk 1 when the other disk 1 packages are installed, or at the very end, but in the middle of disk 4?
i can live with the disk swap and/or use network install. i just am pointing it out as a very odd thing that seemed like an oversight to me. i'd be happier if i could grasp the underlying logic that causes the behaviour.
-
Joe Pruett -
Johnny Hughes -
Karanbir Singh