Installing BunsenLabs Helium-dev

KrunchTime · 2017-08-23 06:42:22

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:

I have changed the instructions in the OP so they use https,

Hmmm...I looked before I replied and I didn't see any mention of https. I guess I missed it.

johnraff · 2017-08-23 07:42:51

The final decision is yours, but maybe this section could be moved down after the netinstall part:

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:

Bootloader
Remember to run `sudo update-grub` (from the "host") after finishing the entire installation, this should pick up the new system and provide a menu entry in the GRUB bootloader.
If a conventional ISO image is used for installation then I would recommend disabling the bootloader step in the installer and updating the pre-existing bootloader configuration afterwards instead.

Applying the netinstall script
---stuff---
Once the script is finished the machine can be rebooted into Helium-dev (hopefully).

HERE, preceded by brief instructions on leaving the chroot eg

exit
exit
umount -R /mnt

?

Head_on_a_Stick · 2017-08-23 20:45:20

^ Done!

Is the modified version OK?

johnraff · 2017-08-24 00:41:32

^Fine - except that two exits are needed to leave the chroot, because you're in a user session. I keep going on about this because it's very hard to tell in a terminal if you're inside a chroot or not, and the possibility for breaking something is there.

Head_on_a_Stick · 2017-08-24 06:03:26

^ D'oh! Changed...

Bearded_Blunder · 2017-09-29 15:59:09

Surely

HoaS wrote:

Install a kernel (yes, the system really is that minimal):
apt install linux-image-amd64 # use "linux-image-i686" for 32-bit systems (without the quotation marks)
Now add the main user:

should be

#use "linux-image-686" for 32-bit systems (without the quotation marks)

rather than i686 ?
and given that it's *highly unlikely* someone will be installing on a PC SO OLD it doesn't support pae wouldn't

#use "linux-image-686-pae" for 32-bit systems (without the quotation marks)

Be a better choice? OK bl-welcome will likely offer to correct that.. but still.. recon I'm likely the only person trying this on a Pentium II and even *that* has pae, even if it runs better with the non-pae kernel.

Head_on_a_Stick · 2017-09-29 16:08:08

Bearded_Blunder wrote:

Surely
HoaS wrote:
Install a kernel (yes, the system really is that minimal):
apt install linux-image-amd64 # use "linux-image-i686" for 32-bit systems (without the quotation marks)
Now add the main user:
should be
#use "linux-image-686" for 32-bit systems (without the quotation marks)
rather than i686 ?

Oh my goodness, so it is — thank you for catching that

given that it's *highly unlikely* someone will be installing on a PC SO OLD it doesn't support pae wouldn't
#use "linux-image-686-pae" for 32-bit systems (without the quotation marks)
Be a better choice?

Erm, would it?

I've never owned a 32-bit computer so you would know better than me, I suppose.

What are the relative advantages of a PAE-enabled kernel, as you see it?

Are you aware that a PAE-enabled kernel does not allow access to >4GiB of RAM (despite the popular misconception)?

https://cl4ssic4l.wordpress.com/2011/05 … about-pae/

Bearded_Blunder · 2017-09-29 16:17:57

Well if so, why does bl-welcome "upgrade" it, or offer? Myself I've never had a 32 bit machine with enough memory to make it worth that "upgrade", so I've tended to say no, given the kernel manual states it introduces some overhead.

Perhaps you should talk to the devs about doing a "downgrade" to non-pae on 32 bit? Since to-date they've appeared to share Debian's opinion that if

cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep pae

says it's there under flags the system "should have" the pae kernel.

Head_on_a_Stick · 2017-09-29 16:21:27

Bearded_Blunder wrote:

Well if so, why does bl-welcome "upgrade" it, or offer?

Does it really?

OK, I've changed the OP, thanks again!

EDIT: to clarify: I fully support and respect the decision of the team to recommend the PAE kernel; I wasn't involved in the decision 'cos I don't use 32-bit hardware.

I stand by the fact that PAE is nonsense though 8)

Last edited by Head_on_a_Stick (2017-09-29 16:24:07)

Bearded_Blunder · 2017-09-29 16:23:37

It offers, under system tweaks, same section it removes superfluous battery icons when there's no battery.

Head_on_a_Stick · 2017-09-29 20:56:18

Bearded_Blunder wrote:

given that it's *highly unlikely* someone will be installing on a PC SO OLD it doesn't support pae wouldn't
#use "linux-image-686-pae" for 32-bit systems (without the quotation marks)
Be a better choice?

Actually, on reflection I am reverting the OP back to linux-image-686 to allow support for all hardware in the expectation that anything capable of supporting PAE will be caught by bl-welcome, as intended.

hhh · 2017-09-29 21:08:15

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:

I stand by the fact that PAE is nonsense though 8)

Still, using the non-PAE kernel on a PAE enabled system will probably result in poor graphics (it did on my old Acer netbook) and maybe other issues.

+1 for letting bl-welcome handle this, though.

Steve · 2017-10-01 06:11:14

I installed helium dev yesterday and just noticed that the root menu > preferences > openbox > gui menu editor has no such file or directory in my install. This should be default install shouldnt it or do i need to manually install as this not provided?

johnraff · 2017-10-01 07:57:51

Steve wrote:

I installed helium dev yesterday and just noticed that the root menu > preferences > openbox > gui menu editor has no such file or directory in my install.

Sorry, but the Stretch version of 'obmenu' hasn't been built yet, breaking that menu item. It should arrive by the time of the "official" release...

Steve · 2017-10-01 08:25:23

johnraff wrote:

Steve wrote:
I installed helium dev yesterday and just noticed that the root menu > preferences > openbox > gui menu editor has no such file or directory in my install.
Sorry, but the Stretch version of 'obmenu' hasn't been built yet, breaking that menu item. It should arrive by the time of the "official" release...

Do you mean built for Bunsenlabs Helium? As i see it is in the debian repos. https://packages.debian.org/stretch/obmenu

johnraff · 2017-10-02 05:47:46

^obmenu had a bug whereby it didn't support the current syntax for commands ie
'<action name="Execute"> <command>...'
but only the older
'<action name="Execute"> <execute>...'

The BL Jesssie package fixed it, but I'm pretty sure that bug still exists in the Debian Stretch version. Having a look and upgrading obmenu for Helium if necessary is on my todo list...

Steve · 2017-10-02 11:06:56

^ upon further reading debian still class it as in testing even though it is in stretch?

https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/obmenu

Is this a case of someone updating it and maintaining it? If i was smart enough to do it i would.

Thanks for the reply John.

Sector11 · 2017-10-02 13:10:35

It changed between #!v9.04 (Unbunt) to #1v10.
Changed back again between #!v10 & #!v11.
A yet again when we came to BL ...

It's been a tick I've noticed with every "dist-upgrade"

bigbenaugust · 2017-10-02 16:36:44

And someone will tell us when to stop using the

 https://kelaino.bunsenlabs.org/~johnraff/debian helium

repo and switch to the real one, right?

hhh · 2017-10-02 17:08:28

@bigben, of course.

#101 2017-08-23 06:42:22

Re: Installing BunsenLabs Helium-dev

#102 2017-08-23 07:42:51

Re: Installing BunsenLabs Helium-dev

Bootloader

Applying the netinstall script

#103 2017-08-23 20:45:20

Re: Installing BunsenLabs Helium-dev

#104 2017-08-24 00:41:32

Re: Installing BunsenLabs Helium-dev

#105 2017-08-24 06:03:26

Re: Installing BunsenLabs Helium-dev

#106 2017-09-29 15:59:09

Re: Installing BunsenLabs Helium-dev

#107 2017-09-29 16:08:08

Re: Installing BunsenLabs Helium-dev

#108 2017-09-29 16:17:57

Re: Installing BunsenLabs Helium-dev

#109 2017-09-29 16:21:27

Re: Installing BunsenLabs Helium-dev

#110 2017-09-29 16:23:37

Re: Installing BunsenLabs Helium-dev

#111 2017-09-29 20:56:18

Re: Installing BunsenLabs Helium-dev

#112 2017-09-29 21:08:15

Re: Installing BunsenLabs Helium-dev

#113 2017-10-01 06:11:14

Re: Installing BunsenLabs Helium-dev

#114 2017-10-01 07:57:51

Re: Installing BunsenLabs Helium-dev

#115 2017-10-01 08:25:23

Re: Installing BunsenLabs Helium-dev

#116 2017-10-02 05:47:46

Re: Installing BunsenLabs Helium-dev

#117 2017-10-02 11:06:56

Re: Installing BunsenLabs Helium-dev

#118 2017-10-02 13:10:35

Re: Installing BunsenLabs Helium-dev

#119 2017-10-02 16:36:44

Re: Installing BunsenLabs Helium-dev

#120 2017-10-02 17:08:28

Re: Installing BunsenLabs Helium-dev

Board footer