David Hrbáč wrote:
> Akemi Yagi napsal(a):
>> You never had this problem under 2.6.18-8.1.14 ? That is curious. I
>> do not know exactly how far back this started happening, but it must
>> be quite sometime ago. Guess Johnny can tell us more.
>>
> Yes, I have pointed it out in the very first pos
Akemi Yagi napsal(a):
> You never had this problem under 2.6.18-8.1.14 ? That is curious. I
> do not know exactly how far back this started happening, but it must
> be quite sometime ago. Guess Johnny can tell us more.
>
> Akemi
Yes, I have pointed it out in the very first post. A new ICH9 patc
On 10/30/07, David Hrbáč <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Akemi Yagi napsal(a):
>
> > I will wait for 5.1 because there is some possibility that this issue
> > is resolved in the newer kernel. In the meantime, the best workaround
> > is to disable signmodules or to use mock.
> >
> > Akemi
>
> Or build
Akemi Yagi napsal(a):
> I will wait for 5.1 because there is some possibility that this issue
> is resolved in the newer kernel. In the meantime, the best workaround
> is to disable signmodules or to use mock.
>
> Akemi
Or build under kernel-2.6.18-8.1.14 :o)
David
__
On 10/29/07, Akemi Yagi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/29/07, David Hrbáč <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> But wait for a while. I do not want to waste your time and your
> cputime. I realize I need to do more testing before asking others.
> As you know more than anyone else, these things take
On 10/29/07, David Hrbáč <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Akemi Yagi napsal(a):
> >> http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/devel/kernel/linux-2.6-execshield.patch?root=extras&rev=1.76&view=log
> > I did my testing with the latest CentOS kernel-2.6.18-8.1.1
Akemi Yagi napsal(a):
>> http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/devel/kernel/linux-2.6-execshield.patch?root=extras&rev=1.76&view=log
> I did my testing with the latest CentOS kernel-2.6.18-8.1.15.el5.i686.
I mean linux-2.6-execshield.patch revision as on
http://cvs.fedora.redhat.
g
> Tanks,
> David
I did my testing with the latest CentOS kernel-2.6.18-8.1.15.el5.i686.
Akemi
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Akemi Yagi napsal(a):
> This particular problem has been known for a while, at least since
> FC6, and reported in:
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=213974
>
> As noted in that report (right after Johnny's comment), I suspect it
> shares the same root cause as another bug #246623 fi
On 10/28/07, Johnny Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> David Hrbáč wrote:
> > Akemi Yagi napsal(a):
> >> Change *all* signmodules to zero as a workround.
> >>
> >> %define signmodules 0
> >>
> >> It would go through then. Or else, build in mock. According to
> >> Johnny, the modsign problem does
David Hrbáč wrote:
> Akemi Yagi napsal(a):
>> Change *all* signmodules to zero as a workround.
>>
>> %define signmodules 0
>>
>> It would go through then. Or else, build in mock. According to
>> Johnny, the modsign problem does not occur in mock.
>>
>> Akemi
>
> OK, thanks.
> D.
I specifically
Akemi Yagi napsal(a):
> Change *all* signmodules to zero as a workround.
>
> %define signmodules 0
>
> It would go through then. Or else, build in mock. According to
> Johnny, the modsign problem does not occur in mock.
>
> Akemi
OK, thanks.
D.
___
On 10/27/07, David Hrbáč <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Akemi Yagi napsal(a):
> > I can certainly try it on my c5-i686 VM. But at which step does it
> > segfault? Does it have to do with modsigning?
> >
> > Akemi
>
> As far as I remember yes.
> D.
Change *all* signmodules to zero as a workround.
Akemi Yagi napsal(a):
> I can certainly try it on my c5-i686 VM. But at which step does it
> segfault? Does it have to do with modsigning?
>
> Akemi
As far as I remember yes.
D.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman
On 10/27/07, David Hrbáč <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> It seems to me, that kernel-2.6.18-8.1.15 is maybe not ok. I have been
> trying to rebuild my patched kernel RPMS in virtual machine running i686
> kernel-2.6.18-8.1.15. It had failed for the three times with
> segmentation fault. First ru
Hi,
It seems to me, that kernel-2.6.18-8.1.15 is maybe not ok. I have been
trying to rebuild my patched kernel RPMS in virtual machine running i686
kernel-2.6.18-8.1.15. It had failed for the three times with
segmentation fault. First run under kernel-2.6.18-8.1.14 went smoothly.
So, maybe it's a k
16 matches
Mail list logo