Remastering Oneiric Alternate (32Bit) not possible

Bug #885399 reported by ranseyer on 2011-11-02
This bug affects 3 people
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
Ubuntu Customization Kit

Bug Description

Host System for Remastering was a brand new Ubuntu 11.10 Alternate (32 Bit; Oneiric Final; ISO: ubuntu-11.10-alternate-i386.iso)

ISO for remastering: the same as above

I have done on the new system:

sudo apt-get install subversion gnupg mc uck
svn co uck
#manually replace /usr/bin/uck* with the newer versions from svn
uck-remaster-unpack-iso ubuntu-11.10-alternate-i386.iso
uck-remaster-finalize-alternate 03EEE71Cuck-remaster-pack-iso

The problem is the same than in the alpha and in the beta versios: Debootstrap-Warnining. For a normal User it looks like the installation aborts. (With press 5-6 times Enter the Installation continues).
The Reason may be really easy, but i did'nt find it.

Here are the Screenshots again:

I would be happy for any Help. (In the first step it would be enough to fix the error manually)
Thank you

ranseyer (martin-neuby) on 2011-11-02
description: updated

seems similar to this:
but i can't understand why deps check fail on the remastered and not on the original iso...

the remastered iso works ok

the iso doesn't work anymore

so i think it's something about uck-remaster-finalize-alternate and apt-ftparchive but actually i don't know where can we take some info on how it changed between oneiric-1 and oneiric...

ranseyer (martin-neuby) wrote :

For me it looks like the installer expect some debs here: /target/var/cache/apt
(But when i try to install with the defect ISO, there are no files here)

Because he wants to install that:

 Warnung: Failure trying to run: chroot /target dpkg --force-depends --install /var/cache/apt/archives/base-passwd_3.5.23_i386.deb

I had this Problem withe the ealry versions of oneiric, with the alpha, beta and final version.

the debs in /target/var/cache are copied from /cdrom, the point is that the files in /cdroom/pool are exactly the same, the differences should be in the index/release files

at the moment we haven't enough competences on the alternate changes in the latest release and we'd need some help from the ubuntu maintainers

Changed in uck:
importance: Undecided → Medium
status: New → Confirmed

Here the screenshot of the error as logged in syslog:

I don't understand which is the blocking error. Candidates are:

- there is no awk (?)
- libc6 not installed?

ranseyer (martin-neuby) wrote :

I have done some more Tests. The latest.
I have done this:

uck-remaster-unpack-iso ubuntu-11.10-alternate-i386.iso
./uck-finalize-manipulated Dxxxxx9 #This Script was manipulated so that the keyring*deb will not be changed ijn /pool

Same Problem: Debootstrap error!

I have done some more tests in the last days: my Result; the problem looks to be in /dists !

we do not touch /dist and anyway nothing changed since oneiric thus it's something that ubuntu changed itself and we would need some documentation to know what and how to workaround...

michel8 (m-strauss) wrote :

Hi, I'm really no ISO-builder-Pro, but ranseyer asked for some comparison-work...

I found the following annomallies:
A) In original Ubuntu-ISO (ubuntu-11.10-alternate-i386.iso) some filenames seem to be cut in length somehow
In the remastered ISO this files have a longer name
Do still fit the given packet-name-references (where ever they are written in) ?
Or did someone cut the filenames to stay in a given limitation of characters and the full names now exceed this limits ?

B) In Ubuntu-ISO and Remastered ISO the file /dists/oneiric/main/debian-installer/binary-i386/Packages.gz are different in length and content (please find attached)
BUT the only change made in the installer-packages was the customizing in partman-base

Unfortunately I have no idea how to check if Packages.gz (resp. the included file) is still OK or buggy or if the changed filenames have this bad influence on the UCK scripts, but I hope someone else can continue on this points to finally define this points as being OK or faulty...

Best Regards
Michel (michle8 from easyvdr)

michel8 (m-strauss) wrote :

The last hours I resorted the files dists/oneiric/main/debian-installer/binary-i386/Packages to have the same order in both files.

Now comparison showed the few following differences:
A) In the Original-ISO each module-entry has as last line
         Supported: 18m
    In a remastered ISO this lines are missing
B) In the entry for the Package gptsync-udeb
     the remtered ISO has the additional line
         Priority: optional
     but the following 2 lines from the Original Iso
         Bugs: and
         Origin: Ubuntu
     don't exist in the remastered ISO
Both files reference the files I mentioned above in uncut length, so
either in Original-Iso these files were't found and didn't were able to cause problems
Or the path- and filename is too long and is shortened automatically than off course longer filenames won't work

The Paket thunderbird-gnome-support... is not referenced in dists/oneiric/main/debian-installer/binary-i386/Packages so we needdn't look on it when discussing the installer-problem...

Regards Michel

ranseyer (martin-neuby) wrote :

Now i have successfully remastered some Oneiric ISOs

Workaround: I splitted the UCK Skripts an have tested in small parts.

Without this two steps it works:
#apt-ftparchive -c $REMASTER_ALT_TMP/apt.conf generate $REMASTER_ALT_TMP/apt-ftparchive-deb.conf
#apt-ftparchive -c $REMASTER_ALT_TMP/apt.conf generate $REMASTER_ALT_TMP/apt-ftparchive-udeb.conf

That means i have changed the checksums and size for all changed packages in /main manually (Keyring + our replacement for partman-base)

The changed testing scripts are here:

I hope this will help fix the problem.

A) apt.conf
(In my case the *finalize Script aborts and i remove the last line of apt.conf and i have to finalize it a second time...)
> /remaster-alt-tmp/apt.conf:10: Extra junk at end of file

the last line of apt.conf:

B) Ubuntu-keyring
I also have deletet the doubled ubuntu-keyring packages manually...

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  Edit
Everyone can see this information.

Duplicates of this bug

Other bug subscribers

Related questions