2010.08-1 archboot "2k10-R6" ISO hybrid image released

tpowa · 2010-08-15 19:47:56

Hi Arch community,

Arch Linux (archboot creation tool) 2010.08-1, "2k10-R6" has been released.
To avoid confusion, this is not an official arch linux iso release!

Homepage and for more information on archboot:
http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Archboot

Summary:
- Complete change to 4k sector drive and windows 7 compatible 1MB boot sector.
- New ftp install groups and package selection
- nilfs2 support added

Hybrid image file and torrent is provided, which include
i686 and x86_64 core repository. Please check md5sum before using it.

Hybrid image file is a standard CD-burnable image and also a raw disk image.
- Can be burned to CD(RW) media using most CD-burning utilities.
- Can be raw-written to a drive using 'dd' or similar utilities.
This method is intended for use with USB thumb drives.

Please get it from your favorite arch linux mirror:
http://www.archlinux.de/?page=GetFileFr … ot/2010.08
<yourmirror>/iso/archboot/2010.08/

Changelog:

GENERAL:
- kernel 2.6.35.2 / LTS kernel 2.6.32.19
- pacman 3.4.0 usage
- RAM recommendations: 320 MB

Kernel changes:
- bump to latest .35 series and bump lts to latest .32 series

Removed features:
- None

Environment changes:
- Updated pacman mirrorlist file

hwdetect changes:
- added nilfs2 support

setup changes:
- support 4k sector drives out of the box
- changed to 1MB bootsector size for optimal alignment
of ssd drives and windows 7 compatibility
- removed cfdisk calling, it's replaced by fdisk now
- reduced gpt bios_grub partition to 1MB, instead of 10MB
- added nilfs2 support
- added more extlinux checks
- added nilfs2 and simple btrfs to autoprepare menu
- changed/fixed ftp install routine to show the
desktop environment groups and xorg.

quickinst changes:
- applied changes from setup

KNOWN ISSUES:
- FTP installation mode:
None
- CD installation mode:
None

Further documentation can be found on-disk and on the wiki.
Have fun!

greetings
tpowa

kgas · 2010-08-16 08:43:18

GENERAL:
- kernel 2.6.35.2 / LTS kernel 2.6.32.19

Downloading. I hope the kernel will move to core shortly from testing.

flamelab · 2010-08-16 08:57:32

I'll seriously try two Virtualbox installations, one with nilfs2 and one with btrfs, it's gonna be interesting

extofme · 2010-08-16 20:11:35

tpowa,

in the previous release thread you had mentioned that "pure subvolume" and raid support [btrfs] does not work with extlinux, what do you mean by this exactly? am i able to create subvols at all, or do you mean i cant boot directly to a subvolume, or set a new default? and by raid support im guessing you mean extlinux only support single device setups, right? im looking to possibly expand on the hook i have in AUR, and am curious about the extent of btrfs support in extlinux.

thanks,

C Anthony

tpowa · 2010-08-16 20:28:18

extlinux doesn't support booting from btrfs raid and booting from btrfs subvolume.
eg. your /boot is on btrfs raid it will fail
if /boot is on a btrfs subvolume it will fail

extlinux supports booting from plain btrfs devices
extlinux supports normal booting from raid1 /dev/md devices

extofme · 2010-08-16 20:32:43

tpowa wrote:

extlinux doesn't support booting from btrfs raid and booting from btrfs subvolume.
eg. your /boot is on btrfs raid it will fail
if /boot is on a btrfs subvolume it will fail
extlinux supports booting from plain btrfs devices
extlinux supports normal booting from raid1 /dev/md devices

ah ok, so /boot must be in the "real" btrfs root... i wonder if it's still possible to use "btrfs set-default" to assign a subvol as the new btrfs "real" root; if so, i could support kernel rollbacks using extlinux.

thanks, quick response :-)

C Anthony

Labello · 2010-08-18 15:20:34

flamelab wrote:

I'll seriously try two Virtualbox installations, one with nilfs2 and one with btrfs, it's gonna be interesting

do u know any way how to enable the compression-feature of btrfs? i saw some benchmarks on phoronix which very massively impressive. But I am not shure how to try it out :-(

tpowa · 2010-08-18 15:25:10

It is just a mount option, add compress to your mount line and i think it will use compression automatically.
archboot setup will ask you if you want to use this option, but defaults to no.

Labello · 2010-08-18 15:28:39

tpowa wrote:

It is just a mount option, add compress to your mount line and i think it will use compression automatically.
archboot setup will ask you if you want to use this option, but defaults to no.

thanks! :-)

*starts making backups*

extofme · 2010-08-18 16:56:37

Labello wrote:

tpowa wrote:
It is just a mount option, add compress to your mount line and i think it will use compression automatically.
archboot setup will ask you if you want to use this option, but defaults to no.
thanks! :-)
*starts making backups*

keep in mind compression works transparently; files/extents will be compressed when they are created/COW'ed. this means files that are only read will remain uncompressed (IIRC), so simply enabling compression will not magically speed things up for an existing system. however, if you enable compression and do a balance, i believe this will compress everything (a balance ATM rewrites everything).

C Anthony

Labello · 2010-08-18 17:49:56

hm... i was gonna do a complete reinstall. and wouldn't the data that i write back from my backup to the new btrfs be compressed? if not this is a bummer :-(

kgas · 2010-08-19 15:30:53

Today kernel 2.6.35.2-1 hit the repo. here goes the new Archboot experience.

First attempt with ftp/http option.
   - this time also at the configuration level faced the problem like the earlier one (empty files)
   - checked the mounting and was fine (photo given below)
   - checked the partitions healthiness with cfdisk and reported problem of cylinders overlap (hard disk was earlier partitioned with another arch install)
     ( an integrity check may be introduced)
   - with base and base-devel selection only at the package selection stage all packages in the repo displayed this will be very difficult to hand pick
        (an earlier suggestion to display the package information was replied as not in near future releases) so aborted for the second attempt
Second attempt with cd/usb option:
     - all went fine this time package selection was ok but for automake and autoconf. Both were reported as corrupted.
     - after installation a pacman -Syu reported iptables and two more packages newer than repo (French)
     - this time also host name set in the rc.conf not reflected in the hosts file

archbootinstall.th.jpg

thanks

Last edited by kgas (2010-08-19 15:31:27)

tpowa · 2010-08-19 16:54:58

First try:
- The empty files, i just can't confirm all installations i tried this doesn't happen
- The long list to handpick is wanted behaviour you don't need to scroll down it's sorted by categories.

Second try:
- Which installation mode you, chose which kernel?
- Hostname should be added at least if you edited rc.conf from installer

RetroX · 2010-08-20 02:46:29

What advantages does this have over just booting onto the official ISO? Wouldn't the official one be more reliable?

Last edited by RetroX (2010-08-20 02:47:01)

kgas · 2010-08-20 06:13:34

Retrox pl read the Archboot wiki.

The long list to handpick is wanted behavior you don't need to scroll down it's sorted by categories

  The issue is difficult to get what libraries / application to be installed tho' pacman handles this. 
   It is true packages are listed in sorted order but without knowing what the packages do, 
   for  eg If I don't know what tiacx-firmware means either I will install or leave it and may face the problem latter. 
   Also a  simple tools missing will make some command not available (in my earlier case killall for eg :P). 
  imho leave the X and other things installation to user (expected to read the wiki or the installation guide before hand)

- I mentioned the second try with packages from cd/usb. 
   warning: bison: local (2.4.3-1) is newer than core (2.4.2-1)
   warning: hdparm: local (9.29-1) is newer than core (9.28-1)
   warning: iproute2: local (2.6.35-3) is newer than core (2.6.34-2)
   The above packages are newer than repo (French) which I did not list in my previous post.
   kernel26 2.6.35.2-1 is installed one.

Last edited by kgas (2010-08-20 06:15:22)

ffjia · 2010-08-20 08:03:33

I used 2010.08-1 archboot to install Arch three days ago, thanks tpowa

And I want to ask some questions:

1. after I installed Arch, the MODULES array /etc/rc.conf looked like this

MODULES=(!e1000e !iwlagn !iwlcore !pcspkr !snd-mixer-oss !snd-pcm-oss !snd-hwdep !snd-page-alloc !snd-pcm !snd-timer !snd !snd-hda-codec !snd-hda-intel !soundcore e1000e iwlagn iwlcore pcspkr snd-mixer-oss snd-pcm-oss snd-hwdep snd-page-alloc snd-pcm snd-timer snd snd-hda-codec snd-hda-intel soundcore)

the !e1000e and e1000e thing is confused, does the !MODULE need to be in the
array?

2. I want to use usbkeybord, so I add "usbinput" in the MODULES array in
/etc/mkinitcpio.conf (as the instruction of installer said)

MODULES="ahci libahci ehci-hcd usbinput ext2 ext4 intel_agp i915"

when generating initial ramdisk, it complains (sort of) "libahci, usbinput
module not found"

is this a installer bug?

3. I choose to use the UUID with the disk partition, but when I run "mount"
only the root partition use UUID

 /dev/disk/by-uuid/3e3772ad-c207-470d-a64e-fa054bd8f348 on / type ext4 (rw,relatime,commit=0)
/dev/mapper/arch-home on /home type ext4 (rw,relatime,commit=0)
/dev/sda1 on /boot type ext2 (rw)

my / is /dev/mapper/arch-root, the /home and /boot partition should also be in
the UUID form, right?

Last edited by ffjia (2010-08-20 08:04:15)

tpowa · 2010-08-20 09:46:14

kgas, when I prepare the archboot isos I usually add also testing packages which I think are not broken, but will move soon.
This will be reported by your mirror, because those packages haven't moved to core yet.

kgas about the ftp installation selection, my intention was select the DE you want and you could add additional packages if you want, you don't need to select anything you haven't chosen before. Only base will be ok too.
I cannot add description of packages it will blow up the dialog or show me a way how to do it in a sane way.
The old ftp routine didn't offer any additional packages beside core.
Perhaps i'll use this routine for a big archboot DVD with all packages included.

kgas and what packages were broken on the CD? i686 or x86_64 booted?

Thanks for your reports, it keeps the ball rolling. You have some time for a jabber or irc meeting?

tpowa · 2010-08-20 09:50:36

RetroX wrote:

What advantages does this have over just booting onto the official ISO? Wouldn't the official one be more reliable?

kgas linke the archboot wiki above, to keep it short:
It offers different things than the official iso, with more features in setup.
Check the list what you need and try it out.

tpowa · 2010-08-20 09:54:41

ffjia wrote:

I used 2010.08-1 archboot to install Arch three days ago, thanks tpowa
And I want to ask some questions:
1. after I installed Arch, the MODULES array /etc/rc.conf looked like this
MODULES=(!e1000e !iwlagn !iwlcore !pcspkr !snd-mixer-oss !snd-pcm-oss !snd-hwdep !snd-page-alloc !snd-pcm !snd-timer !snd !snd-hda-codec !snd-hda-intel !soundcore e1000e iwlagn iwlcore pcspkr snd-mixer-oss snd-pcm-oss snd-hwdep snd-page-alloc snd-pcm snd-timer snd snd-hda-codec snd-hda-intel soundcore)
the !e1000e and e1000e thing is confused, does the !MODULE need to be in the
array?
Yes, i think i'll add it to the wiki, it's for consistent network ordering, else udev might change the order of multiple network/soundcards.
2. I want to use usbkeybord, so I add "usbinput" in the MODULES array in
/etc/mkinitcpio.conf (as the instruction of installer said)
MODULES="ahci libahci ehci-hcd usbinput ext2 ext4 intel_agp i915"
when generating initial ramdisk, it complains (sort of) "libahci, usbinput
module not found"
is this a installer bug?
No you need this in HOOKS= array, setup should ask you if you already used usb keyboard while installing to add this automatically.
3. I choose to use the UUID with the disk partition, but when I run "mount"
only the root partition use UUID
 /dev/disk/by-uuid/3e3772ad-c207-470d-a64e-fa054bd8f348 on / type ext4 (rw,relatime,commit=0)
/dev/mapper/arch-home on /home type ext4 (rw,relatime,commit=0)
/dev/sda1 on /boot type ext2 (rw)
my / is /dev/mapper/arch-root, the /home and /boot partition should also be in
the UUID form, right?

This is normal mount behaviour, no need to worry it uses uuid!

ffjia · 2010-08-20 12:30:16

tpowa wrote:

This is normal mount behaviour, no need to worry it uses uuid!

I'm not worry about using UUID, I am just curious about why other partitions not using UUID.........

tpowa · 2010-08-20 13:59:17

They are used, check your fstab file if only uuid is in there then all is fine, mount just shows it that way.

michaudg · 2010-08-21 23:02:26

Hi,

I would like to share my solution for a problem i had with partitions detection with RAID0 (Intel Storage) with archboot 2010.07 and 2010.08 (x86_64).

In the shell, dmraid detected all my three partitions successfully. I could access to :

/dev/mapper/isw_xxxxxxxxxp1
/dev/mapper/isw_xxxxxxxxxp2
/dev/mapper/isw_xxxxxxxxxp3

In the setup, when i chose Setup Filesystem Mountpoints, all the partitions were detected twice and listed twice and differently in the partition menu :

/dev/mapper/isw_xxxxxxxxxp1
/dev/mapper/isw_xxxxxxxxxp2
/dev/mapper/isw_xxxxxxxxxp3
/dev/mapper//dev/mapper/isw_xxxxxxxxxp1
/dev/mapper//dev/mapper/isw_xxxxxxxxxp2
/dev/mapper//dev/mapper/isw_xxxxxxxxxp3

The first three items resulted in an exit to the main menu without any errors and the last three resulted in error (unable to find "/dev/mapper//dev/mapper/isw...") when cfdisk tried to access them.

I had to edit /arch/setup and comment line #530 in findpartition() function.

# dmraid_partitions $1

With this fix, Setup Filesystem Mountpoints shows me a correct list of my partitions (only 3) and all of those were accessible by cfdisk.

I hope that it will help somebody and maybe it could be fixed in the next archboot release.

Thanks to tpowa for his great job on archboot iso !

Last edited by michaudg (2010-08-22 13:31:36)

tpowa · 2010-08-22 08:20:23

Would you please try this setup:
http://dev.archlinux.org/~tpowa/setup-dmraid.sh

ffjia · 2010-08-23 01:05:25

tpowa wrote:

They are used, check your fstab file if only uuid is in there then all is fine, mount just shows it that way.

The fstab file does use UUID, thanks man

ArchIMEDE · 2010-08-23 09:40:38

Hi!

I'm glad to notice that this release allows us to install Arch with all partitions encapsulated in LVM volumes (even the "/boot" one) stored in an extenal usb disk. script takes care of existing partitions/pv/vg and lv and installs Arch correctly. Grub2 is correctly configured and nothing has to be change in config file.
I appreciated you implemented my proposal about comments for devices in fstab and grub.cfg

Many Thanks !

Yesterday, I tried to install Arch within this following lanscape:
/dev/mapper/vg-boot /boot ext2
/dev/mapper/vg-root / btrfs
/dev/mapper/vg-home /home btrfs
/dev/mapper/vg-usr /usr btrfs
/dev/mapper/vg-opt /opt btrfs
/dev/mapper/vg-srv /srv btrfs
/dev/mapper/vg-var /var btrfs
/dev/mapper/vg-tmp /tmp btrfs

during packages installation, a lot warning messages occured: permission differ /usr is 555 package is 755 (or something like this)
same messages for files installed in /var

after reboot, installing new packages raises same messages

I never encountered such messages with previous releases

Thanks for all your work

Last edited by ArchIMEDE (2010-08-23 09:54:40)

Arch Linux

#1 2010-08-15 19:47:56

2010.08-1 archboot "2k10-R6" ISO hybrid image released

#2 2010-08-16 08:43:18

Re: 2010.08-1 archboot "2k10-R6" ISO hybrid image released

#3 2010-08-16 08:57:32

Re: 2010.08-1 archboot "2k10-R6" ISO hybrid image released

#4 2010-08-16 20:11:35

Re: 2010.08-1 archboot "2k10-R6" ISO hybrid image released

#5 2010-08-16 20:28:18

Re: 2010.08-1 archboot "2k10-R6" ISO hybrid image released

#6 2010-08-16 20:32:43

Re: 2010.08-1 archboot "2k10-R6" ISO hybrid image released

#7 2010-08-18 15:20:34

Re: 2010.08-1 archboot "2k10-R6" ISO hybrid image released

#8 2010-08-18 15:25:10

Re: 2010.08-1 archboot "2k10-R6" ISO hybrid image released

#9 2010-08-18 15:28:39

Re: 2010.08-1 archboot "2k10-R6" ISO hybrid image released

#10 2010-08-18 16:56:37

Re: 2010.08-1 archboot "2k10-R6" ISO hybrid image released

#11 2010-08-18 17:49:56

Re: 2010.08-1 archboot "2k10-R6" ISO hybrid image released

#12 2010-08-19 15:30:53

Re: 2010.08-1 archboot "2k10-R6" ISO hybrid image released

#13 2010-08-19 16:54:58

Re: 2010.08-1 archboot "2k10-R6" ISO hybrid image released

#14 2010-08-20 02:46:29

Re: 2010.08-1 archboot "2k10-R6" ISO hybrid image released

#15 2010-08-20 06:13:34

Re: 2010.08-1 archboot "2k10-R6" ISO hybrid image released

#16 2010-08-20 08:03:33

Re: 2010.08-1 archboot "2k10-R6" ISO hybrid image released

#17 2010-08-20 09:46:14

Re: 2010.08-1 archboot "2k10-R6" ISO hybrid image released

#18 2010-08-20 09:50:36

Re: 2010.08-1 archboot "2k10-R6" ISO hybrid image released

#19 2010-08-20 09:54:41

Re: 2010.08-1 archboot "2k10-R6" ISO hybrid image released

#20 2010-08-20 12:30:16

Re: 2010.08-1 archboot "2k10-R6" ISO hybrid image released

#21 2010-08-20 13:59:17

Re: 2010.08-1 archboot "2k10-R6" ISO hybrid image released

#22 2010-08-21 23:02:26

Re: 2010.08-1 archboot "2k10-R6" ISO hybrid image released

#23 2010-08-22 08:20:23

Re: 2010.08-1 archboot "2k10-R6" ISO hybrid image released

#24 2010-08-23 01:05:25

Re: 2010.08-1 archboot "2k10-R6" ISO hybrid image released

#25 2010-08-23 09:40:38

Re: 2010.08-1 archboot "2k10-R6" ISO hybrid image released

Board footer