Bug#45020: marked as done (lockvc not unlocking vc)
Your message dated Sun, 10 Dec 2000 23:24:50 + with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line bug#45020: lockvc not unlocking vc has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Darren Benham (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 13 Sep 1999 17:59:23 + Received: (qmail 5047 invoked from network); 13 Sep 1999 17:59:22 - Received: from unknown (HELO mailsrv.nu.edu.ph) (202.138.131.68) by master.debian.org with SMTP; 13 Sep 1999 17:59:22 - Received: from 202.138.131.70 ([202.138.131.70]) by mailsrv.nu.edu.ph with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.1960.3) id S4VSQBPM; Tue, 14 Sep 1999 02:00:21 +0100 Received: (qmail 363 invoked by uid 1000); 11 Sep 1999 14:24:44 - Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: "k e c h i e" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: lockvc not unlocking vc X-Mailer: reportbug 0.27 Date: Sat, 11 Sep 1999 22:24:44 +0800 Package: lockvc Version: 3.4-2 Severity: important lockvc could not unlock my vc even if I enter the root passwd. That's all -- System Information Debian Release: potato Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux etok 2.2.9 #12 Sat Sep 11 23:24:58 PHT 1999 i586 Versions of packages lockvc depends on: ii libc6 2.1.2-1GNU C Library: Shared libraries an ii libpam-pwdb 0.69-2 PAM module to enable libpwdb (Pass ii libpam0g 0.69-2 Pluggable Authentication Modules l ii svgalibg1 1:1.4.0-1 SVGA display utilities -- Configuration Files: /etc/pam.d/lockvc removed --- Received: (at 45020-done) by bugs.debian.org; 10 Dec 2000 23:18:48 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Dec 10 17:18:48 2000 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from web1.lanscape.net [64.240.156.194] (root) by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian)) id 145Fk0-00058M-00; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 17:18:48 -0600 Received: from sumpf.cyrius.com (IDENT:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [64.240.156.194]) by web1.lanscape.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA09803 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 17:18:47 -0600 Received: by sumpf.cyrius.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id C3A121527A; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 23:24:50 + (GMT) Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 23:24:50 + From: Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: bug#45020: lockvc not unlocking vc Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; from [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Sat, Sep 11, 1999 at 10:24:44PM +0800 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * k e c h i e <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [19990911 22:24]: > lockvc could not unlock my vc even if I enter the root passwd. > That's all > > -- Configuration Files: > /etc/pam.d/lockvc removed I'm closing this bug because 1. e-mail to the submitter bounces and 2. because I assume he had deleted /etc/pam.d/lockvc by hand which of course isn't a good thing to do. -- Martin Michlmayr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Trying to get 3c59x to work with two 3c900bs ...
according to Becker's suggestion to fix it, I needed to build his source file, as the version he built worked fine with multiple 3c900bs. I got the 3c59x.o file built with the 2.2.17 kernel, whose sources I downloaded in terms of .deb files (including the sources) from a debian mirror. I built the 3c59x.c from Donald Becker's netdrivers.tgz, but it gets the following diagnostic messages from an attempt to insmod: 3c59x.o: unresolved symbol acpi_wake 3c59x.o: unresolved symbol acpi_set_pwr_state 3c59x.o: unresolved symbol pci_drv_unregister 3c59x.o: unresolved symbol pci_drv_register I've never had to accompany this driver with any other module before, so presumably the version I've got isn't building right, either because it doesn't work with my kernel, or I'm just leaving something out in my novices attempt to hack the build. Has anyone else seen this problem or especially seen a solution to it? I really want to eventually stick in three 3c900b cards into this machine, and my testing shows with this kernel from Debian it won't work with two, but it will with one. Just in case you didn't see my other posting, Donald Becker sent me a response saying the 3c59x module I was using (from the latest Debian install of the time, early last week) was modified from the one he maintained, as his did not have this problem. Presumably this should be considered a bug with the Debian install for 2.2.17 kernel, or whatever the install set is called.