On Wednesday 2008 December 10 15:15:56 lee wrote: >what's the difference between a standard kernel and a kernel that >comes as a Debian package?
The Debian kernel has some non-free (as in: source not available) parts removed. There are also Debian-specific patches added. >So is there a difference between Debian and standard kernels so that I >might not have this problem if I'd use a Debian kernel? Not that I know of. >Has this >problem been solved in some way yet? Not that I know of. You (or someone else that can reliably reproduce the problem -- perhaps some paid support personnel) need to work with the kernel developers to identify why the kernel is "losing" the drive and if it is due to a bug in the kernel or some hardware issue that can be worked around in the kernel. Yeah, it's a problem, but it's virtually impossible to diagnose that kind of error without instrumenting (jargon: attaching real-/run-time sensors to) the kernel and reproducing the problem, many times. Causing the kernel to "dump" (similar to a process coredumping, but the whole kernel) when some symptom (super_written get error = -5, maybe?) manifests might give you an image that a kernel hacker could perform a post-mortem on. Enough dumps might show a pattern. If you can find a kernel that does work, you might be able to do a "git bisect" and identify the patch(es) that broke you -- but that would certainly be a project. How much resources do you want to spend on fixing the problem? (If you kick in enough, I'll bet the kernel hackers will kick in some, too.) -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.org/ \_/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
