[sf-lug] debian base system (initially without X11) install progress (or lack there of!) report

[Alex Kleider]

On 2018-12-12 00:40, Rick Moen wrote:
> ... the installer absolutely needs apt-get and dpkg after
> installing the base system, because those are what are required to do
> subsequent package operations.

That's what I was also thinking.
The exact response:
# dpkg -i firmware-iwlwifi_20161130-4_all.deb
-/bin/sh: dpkg: not found

I tried the above many times (going back and forth from the (alt-f1) 
terminal doing the installation and another (alt-f2) terminal (where I 
successfully mounted my usb stick) and attempted the dpkg command at 
each stage of the installation process (including at the very end before 
rebooting into the new system.)


> 
> Maybe you didn't got far enough into installation of the base system to
> get that and other tools.  Didn't I stress that you will want to go
> _back_ in the series of installer screens to the one that recognises 
> and
> configures network interfaces?  One of the strengths of Debian's d-i
> installer (as with RHEL/CentOS/Fedora's anaconda installer) is that you
> can at any point (up to the reboot at the end of installation of the
> base system) go back and revisit any of the prior screens.

Yes, I'm aware of this and that was my plan.

> 
> And, by the way, your phrase 'was not available' is once again your
> interpretaion rather than raw data.  I don't want to sound too picky,
> but it would be some much better if you'd taken real-time notes and
> detail wat you did and what specific responses occurred, in
> chronological order with sufficient context.

Noted!
> 
> Probably you mean that at some unstated part of the installer process,
> you switched to another console and typed 'dpkg -i [packagename]' as 
> the
> root user, and the shell responded 'dpkg: command not found'.

> 
> After Eric Raymond and I wrote 'How to Ask Question the Smart Way' ...

Great contribution, by the way!

> In hindsight, I know what happens:  People do _not_ bother keeping
> contemporaneous, accurate notes of the sequence of events when things 
> go
> wrong.  They wait until afterwards ds and post their somewhat hazy
> post-hoc recollection of events, which inevitably ends up being mostly
> their interpretations rather than raw data -- instead of doing the more
> time-consuming but wiser thing of going back and doing it again, taking
> notes the second time.  So, both the querent and the helper end up 
> being
> frustrated.

As much as I try to do otherwise, at least to some extent: guilty as 
charged.


>> Is this something worth bringing up in a Debian forum/list?
>> 
>> Alex