> > Get the following harmless quip on boot:
> > Dec 23 18:26:18 d_baron kernel: Testing NMI watchdog ... CPU#0: NMI
> > appears to be stuck (0->0)!
>
> This means that on your motherboard/CPUs kernel was unable
> to setup NMI watchdog. nothing bad, except for kernel won't be
> able to detect it's
David,
>>Compiled and booted!! I apparently will work with "voluntary preemption" as
>>well as "no premption". No oopses, flags. Next week I will start to play with
>>it!
>
>
>>Caveat:
>>Unionfs will not compile against the patched sources (not using it yet so it
>>can wait).
>
>
> Get the
Hi
Thanks for your help with this bug.
On Sat, Dec 23, 2006 at 07:01:47PM +0200, David Baron wrote:
> >Compiled and booted!! I apparently will work with "voluntary preemption" as
> >well as "no premption". No oopses, flags. Next week I will start to play
> >with
> >it!
>
> >Caveat:
> >Unionfs
>Compiled and booted!! I apparently will work with "voluntary preemption" as
>well as "no premption". No oopses, flags. Next week I will start to play with
>it!
>Caveat:
>Unionfs will not compile against the patched sources (not using it yet so it
>can wait).
Get the following harmless quip on
David,
> Compiled and booted!! I apparently will work with "voluntary preemption" as
> well as "no premption". No oopses, flags. Next week I will start to play with
> it!
thanks a lot for patience and help!
all the faced bugs will be fixed in next version.
> Caveat:
> Unionfs will not compile a
Compiled and booted!! I apparently will work with "voluntary preemption" as
well as "no premption". No oopses, flags. Next week I will start to play with
it!
Caveat:
Unionfs will not compile against the patched sources (not using it yet so it
can wait).
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PRO
David,
> Got it to build and even attempt to boot--no undefineds!
thanks a lot for your help!
the previous bugs are fixed: http://bugzilla.openvz.org/show_bug.cgi?id=411
> The thing listed a lot of oops codes, many involving the journaling, so I
> panicked and stopped it.
>
> Additionally, ther
Got it to build and even attempt to boot--no undefineds!
The thing listed a lot of oops codes, many involving the journaling, so I
panicked and stopped it.
Additionally, there were items like:
BUG: Using SMP with preemptive
(or something like that.)
(I do not have multiple processors but t
David Baron wrote:
> On Thursday 21 December 2006 08:16, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
>
>>Hi David
>>
>>When I compiled the kernel yesterday using the same version of the kernel
>>and the openvz patch I did not need to do anything with symlinking.
>>
>>My compile line look something like this:
>>export PA
On Thursday 21 December 2006 08:16, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
> Hi David
>
> When I compiled the kernel yesterday using the same version of the kernel
> and the openvz patch I did not need to do anything with symlinking.
>
> My compile line look something like this:
> export PATCH_THE_KERNEL=true
> unta
Hi David
When I compiled the kernel yesterday using the same version of the kernel
and the openvz patch I did not need to do anything with symlinking.
My compile line look something like this:
export PATCH_THE_KERNEL=true
untar xxx.tar.gz
cd /usr/src/linux
make-kpkg -rfakeroot --append-to-version
David,
>>David,
>>ahhh... I guess I know the answer.
>>you simply set CONFIG_VE_CALLS to 'y', while IPV6 support is in module,
>>so OpenVZ kernel has reference to symbols in module :/
>
>
>>Pleae check CONFIG_VE_CALLS, CONFIG_VZ_DEV and CONFIG_IPV6 options
> These thing are indeed set to 'y', IP
> This would seem to indicate one (or more) pieces that need be compiled into
> the kernel, would it not? (I do compile in all the ovz stuff rather than
> leave as modules because I had missing symbols on boot the last time I
> tried.)
>
> If someone could point me in the correct direction
David,
can you attach your resulting .config file please?
Thanks,
Kirill
>>>Hi
>>>
>>>I have built it now and I have no problem building. Not at least
>>>with make-kpkg.
>>
>>I use this.
>>
>>
>>>According to upstream you did not run make oldconfig for some reason?
>>
>>It does this anyway. I co
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> I have built it now and I have no problem building. Not at least
>>> with make-kpkg.
>>
>>I use this.
>>
>>> According to upstream you did not run make oldconfig for some reason?
>>
>>It does this anyway. I compied to .config from the non-patched kernel and
was
>>asked to fill in v
>> Hi
>>
>> I have built it now and I have no problem building. Not at least
>> with make-kpkg.
>
>I use this.
>
>> According to upstream you did not run make oldconfig for some reason?
>
>It does this anyway. I compied to .config from the non-patched kernel and was
>asked to fill in various new i
>> Hi
>>
>> I have built it now and I have no problem building. Not at least
>> with make-kpkg.
>
>I use this.
>
>> According to upstream you did not run make oldconfig for some reason?
>
>It does this anyway. I compied to .config from the non-patched kernel and was
>asked to fill in various new i
On Tuesday 19 December 2006 22:07, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
> Hi
>
> Which kernel version did you apply it against? I have successfully
> built it... The version in testing or in unstable?
Latest as of a couple of days ago from unstable, 2.16-8, I believe. The
version of the patch current as of that
Hi
I have built it now and I have no problem building. Not at least
with make-kpkg.
According to upstream you did not run make oldconfig for some reason?
So my question to you (before I close this bug) is how exactly you
built the kernel?
Did you do as described in the README file or in some ot
Hi
Thanks for the information.
I'll tell the user to compile it in a proper way.
Regards,
// Ola
On Wed, Dec 20, 2006 at 09:27:23AM +0300, Vasily Tarasov wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Ola Lundqvist wrote:
> > Privet
> >
> > I got the following bug report. Do you know why this problem exist?
> >
> > Reg
Hi
Which kernel version did you apply it against? I have successfully
built it... The version in testing or in unstable?
Regards,
// Ola
On Tue, Dec 19, 2006 at 10:58:40AM +0200, David Baron wrote:
> Package: kernel-patch-openvz
> Version: 028test007.1
> Severity: important
> Justification: fai
Package: kernel-patch-openvz
Version: 028test007.1
Severity: important
Justification: fails to build from source
Here they are: (May be others as well.)
kernel/built-in.o: In function `do_env_create':
vecalls.c:(.text+0x349a7): undefined reference to `ve_snmp_proc_init'
vecalls.c:(.text+0x34a96):
22 matches
Mail list logo
