An installation step failed. Software selection

[etcetera]

No matter what I did, I could not bypass this step. Whether you go with the defaults, which are XFCE, collection of tools, top 10, default (bottom 3 checked), it just goes into this:

An installation step failed. You can try to run this failing item again from the menu, or skip it and choose something else.

When it finally booted, did so into shell, none of the X-Windows could start, no startx found. I could not install startx or any GUI.
What a poorly designed installer. None of the software selection permutations made any difference. On top of it, it hang during boot with the nouveau driver.

This latest-greatest release needs more work and more testing, not ready for prime time.

 

[CaffeineAddict]

I had this issue during installment of debian a few times and it turned out to be corrupt image.
You should always check sha sum against downloaded image and in addition to that check integrity of the image from installer, there should be an option in the installer when booted from USB or DVD.

 

[etcetera]

I see.
Maybe I should re-download it. I did not see the integrity check option when booted off the flash drive. At what point do I see it?
I am getting frustrated.

I tried an older release a few years ago and ran into issues with it as well, but got farther than this time.

 

[CaffeineAddict]

I don't know if Kali has integrity test in the installer (debian does have it), it should be in the initial menu after choosing installment option.
If it doesn't then check integrity of the downloaded ISO.

Link below explains how to do it:

Downloading Kali Linux | Kali Linux Documentation

IMPORTANT! Never download Kali Linux images from anywhere other than the official sources. Always be sure to verify the SHA256 checksums of the file you’ve downloaded against our official values. It would be easy for a malicious entity to modify a Kali installation to contain exploits or malware...

www.kali.org

 

[etcetera]

No. It has nothing to do with the integrity of the file. I re-downloaded it. It's exactly the same file. Had it been corrupt, it wouldn't even done anything at all and odds are astronomically against two separate downloads generating the system error.
It's working exactly as intended, in the sense that there is a built-in error there.
It's the installer which is buggy and / or the content of the install. I've never had a corrupt file with other distros, Like going back decades I don't recall it. Unless the source file is corrupt and I am downloading the wrong thing, which again is highly improbable.

No matter what I do, trying all permutations, I get the below errors.

this machine, this exact configuration has ran a multitude of distributions, all with no such issues. Looks like due to the software not getting installed bug, it can't handle the Nvidia I got and hangs during boot, doesn't even get to the command-line prompt this time.

I can troubleshoot this, but why? When I am 15 minutes away from getting another distro up and running. The installer / software is complete junk. I've done UNIX admin for decades, Linux for the last decade, I am not ignorant/inept.
It needs to go back to developers, this version is not ready for prime-time. I am submitting my bug report here. So other users are aware and don't waste their time and aggravation on 2024.1
Kali Linux badly needs another major or at least minor release.

I didn't even touch on the matter of using LVM with a custom config, I had no option to define the sizes I liked and it got me 10GB /var, (I need 50GB), 2GB /tmp (Not enough at all) and an absurd 1.4TB /home which I don't need at all, or 50GB at most. So going with that, I would have to go into single-user mode and resize the entire filesystem. Resizing /var is a pain, can't do it when the box is up in multiuser. Again extra work and why? When other distros let you define precisely like you want it during the install process.

https://imgur.com/a/FpMXdPT

https://imgur.com/g8n2Zo3

https://imgur.com/YkohXIa

 

[CaffeineAddict]

If "select and install software" fails then you shouldn't have installed the system so your 3rd screenshot shouldn't be possible, have you skipped and ignored "select and install software" step?

I suggest you to uncheck all boxes in that step and select only 1 desktop environment.

I also suppose you always select Xfce?
Try some other DE, ex. choose KDE, but only KDE and nothing else, deselect everything else.

 

[osprey]

@etcetera wrote:

It needs to go back to developers, this version is not ready for prime-time. I am submitting my bug report here. So other users are aware and don't waste their time and aggravation on 2024.1

Kali bug reporting rightfully goes here:

My View - Kali Linux Bug Tracker

bugs.kali.org

There's info here:

Submitting Bugs for Kali Linux | Kali Linux Documentation

Introduction This article is a guide for putting together a bug report so that it gets addressed as quickly as possible. First, Kali Linux is a labor of love, born out of a desire to give back to the community, a community that we’re a part of. In our development roles, it’s our goal to...

www.kali.org

It's interesting to read about bugs in the forum, but for effective action on them, the reports are best going to the places that can, and do deal directly with them on a technical level.

 

[etcetera]

I am not going to invest any more time in it, it's pointless. Already went through the process 3-4 times.
Even if I posted a video, someone would still find a way to blame the user.
If the above is not sufficient to prove the install for this particular release is broken, nothing else will suffice. I am going back to either Oracle Linux or an Ubuntu-based distro, have not decided yet. OL9.3 is a safe choice.
I will try it again in a year or whatnot to see if it's fixed, but literally, with 1000 and 1 other distros you can get running on your machine in 20 minutes, what's the point. It's pure frustration. I am not going to fix developer's bugs for them or be a Beta-tester which is what apparently I am.
I don't like it anyway due to some other reasons I posted. Predefining the LVM LVOL sizes is stupid. I have my own requirements how the Logical Volume Manager needs to be set up. I have a very specific thing that needs a lot of space in /var. 100, maybe 200GB. The only way to get more than 10GB they allocate in /var is to put everything under "/" but that would not work either since I need separate mount points for /tmp, /var, /var/log, /usr et cetera. Or alternatively, go with their LVM predefined choices and then have fun resizing the filesystem in single-user mode. I got better things to do. And when you resize /usr or /var you always run the risk of hosing everything.

 

[f33dm3bits]

I am not going to invest any more time in it, it's pointless.

Kali isn't meant to be used as a daily driver or a server anyways.

I am going back to either Oracle Linux or an Ubuntu-based distro, have not decided yet. OL9.3 is a safe choice.

I don't like it anyway due to some other reasons I posted. Predefining the LVM LVOL sizes is stupid. I have my own requirements how the Logical Volume Manager needs to be set up.

So you're better off with either Ubuntu or OL or Rocky if you plan to use it as a server or workstation, I have setup Debian with different lvm volumes in the past. I have never tried it with Kali but I don't use Kali since I have no use for it, I only install it in a vm every now and then to test something out.

 

[CaffeineAddict]

Already went through the process 3-4 times.
Even if I posted a video, someone would still find a way to blame the user.

You went trough the process but did not provide feedback with us what you did and whether you did as suggested nor did you answer to question asked so it's difficult to help.

 

[osprey]

@etcetera wrote:

I am not going to fix developer's bugs for them or be a Beta-tester which is what apparently I am.

I'm not sure developers are asking users to fix bugs, but one important way in which linux improves is by having bugs reported to the bug lists so that developers can resolve them one way or another which ends up to everyone's great benefit. That is a significant advantage that the linux community, and free open source software community approach to development has over proprietary and closed systems approaches. So, if there's a bug, it's a "good thing" to report it and then something can be done about it if it's actually deemed to be a problem.

If users do have fixes for bugs, such as patches to code or suggestions, they are usually welcomed by developers but in the end they'll be assessed and used accordingly.