reassign 257469 module-init-tools
reassign 257510 module-init-tools
thanks
Looks like this symlink bug has been fixed upstream, in pre5. From
upstream's changelog:
o depmod: don't follow symlinks, broken in updates/ rework.
Hopefully Md will be able to prepare pre5 quickly.
--
Andres Salomon
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 257469 module-init-tools
Bug#257469: kernel-source-2.6.7: Unable to build kernel_image
Bug reassigned from package `kernel-source-2.6.7' to `module-init-tools'.
> reassign 257510 module-init-tools
Bug#257510: modules loaded from build area ins
On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 03:04:16 +0200, Alex Schroeder wrote:
> Package: kernel-image-2.6.7-1-k7
> Version: 2.6.7-1
> Severity: normal
>
>
> My MP3 player was not recognized under 2.6.6; there was a patch that
> fixed it. This patch is now in 2.6.7. It works when I use
> kernel-image-2.6.7-1-686.
Package: kernel-image-2.6.7-1-k7
Version: 2.6.7-1
Severity: normal
My MP3 player was not recognized under 2.6.6; there was a patch that
fixed it. This patch is now in 2.6.7. It works when I use
kernel-image-2.6.7-1-686. When I use kernel-image-2.6.7-1-k7,
however, it does not work. The patch
Package: kernel-source-2.6.7
Version: 2.6.7-2
Followup-For: Bug #257469
/mnt/src/kernel-source-2.6.7 $ ls -l debian/tmp-image/lib/modules/2.6.7/
total 4
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 28 Jul 4 02:34 build ->
/mnt/src/kernel-source-2.6.7
drwxr-xr-x 10 root root 4096 Jul 4 02:35 kern
Sorry, I should read a little more closely before sending off bug reports.
Downgrading module-init-tools from 3.1-pre4-1 to 3.1-pre2-2 resolved the
issue for me, so it looks like a problem with module-init-tools.
Thanks.
--
Thomas
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Package: kernel-source-2.6.7
Version: 2.6.7-2
After building a custom kernel via make-kpkg and installing it, I am
finding that modules do not get loaded on boot.
In previous versions, modprobe would look in /lib/modules//kernel
but with this new kernel it's looking in /lib/modules//build
Now as
On Sat, 03 Jul 2004 14:00:32 -0400, John Stilian wrote:
> Package: kernel-source-2.6.7
> Version: 2.6.7-2
> Severity: important
> Justification: fails to build from source
>
> Attempting to build a slightly customized 2.6.7 kernel with built in support
> for IDE, as well as necessary hardware for
Package: kernel-source-2.6.7
Version: 2.6.7
A user with a local account can change the owner and the permissions of
files in /proc. Affected is at least kernel 2.6.7, but possibly all 2.6.x
kernels.
hydra proc $ cd /proc
hydra proc $ ls -la config.gz
-r--r--r-- 1 root root 6354 3. Jul 23:25 co
Sven Luther wrote:
[snip]
> > > For more info, read the debian-vote mailing lists archive.
> > >
> > > And welcome to debian politics :)
> >
> > Hmm, I wonder what this means for the firmware blob issues..
>
> Firmware is software, they can't be considered as data or documentation
> by any stret
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
[snip]
> > For more info, read the debian-vote mailing lists archive.
> >
> > And welcome to debian politics :)
>
> Hmm, I wonder what this means for the firmware blob issues..
AFAICS every change is postponed until sarge releases, and then the
whole circus starts again.
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 11:17:47PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> Well, you don't like the patch, and Herbert didn't, now, the question is
> what about the functionality ? Do you also discard it because it is not
> the one true way of kernel booting, or do you find it acceptable ?
As it's stated in t
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 11:34:37PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Actually it's a (fake-)adb keyboard. But adb already uses the generic
> input layer in 2.4 like usb, so it's the same reason.
s/keyboard/trackpad/ the former is true aswell, but completely
irrelevant for this discussion ;-)
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 11:36:02PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Well, there's people dual-booting into both 2.4 and 2.6 kernels. I do
> > that myself, although on macs we've used /dev/input/mice in 2.4 already
> > anyway.
>
> Becaue you had a usb keyboard.
>
> Also, this is one of the reason i
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 11:28:34PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 11:29:47PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > I don't quite like either of those. I'll try to take a look at the
> > > X Code and/or talk to the X folks on whether we could fix X to autoprobe
> > > for a core
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 11:27:21PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 11:28:39PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Well, there was a syntactic social contract GR which slyly passed the
> > more important decision that all stuff in debian is now software,
> > including documentati
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 11:20:56PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > Who talked about modularizing all fb drivers for all architectures. And
> > > btw, many architectures have text-only firmware-based consoles that
> > > allow early debugging (even long before any fb driver can take over
> > >
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 10:57:00PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> Yeah, in the meantime, i need to release a 2.4.26 kernel as there are
> people clamoring for it, since the 2.4.25 has some security holes whose
> fixes where not backported, and 2.6 is not considered stable by some
> users yet (and if y
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 07:38:14PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 01, 2004 at 04:25:22PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Well, if you would go out of your x86-centric world, you would know that
> > half if not more of the architectures debian support _DON'T_ have text
> > console. You
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 11:29:47PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > I don't quite like either of those. I'll try to take a look at the
> > X Code and/or talk to the X folks on whether we could fix X to autoprobe
> > for a corepointer.
>
> I would rather fix it in the installed XF86Config file, so we
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 11:28:39PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> Well, there was a syntactic social contract GR which slyly passed the
> more important decision that all stuff in debian is now software,
> including documentation and data. This meant that all the GFDL software
> was now considered non
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 11:15:11PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 10:43:20PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > The /dev/psaux situation seems to be a big mess. I added /dev/psaux
> > > upstream long ago so I wouldn't have to change my XF86Config for 2.4
> > > vs 2.6. In t
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 11:16:43PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 10:46:00PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Willian, could you enlighten us of the possible future standard that is
> > emerging for future kernels ? As well as how they will fit into this,
> > especially give
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 10:55:09PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > So what exact problems does the patch you propose solve? Which systems
> > don't boot/corrupt data/start nuclear wars without it? Do you
> > understand what exactly the patch does?
>
> You have to ask Frederik about the e
> > Who talked about modularizing all fb drivers for all architectures. And
> > btw, many architectures have text-only firmware-based consoles that
> > allow early debugging (even long before any fb driver can take over
> > control)
>
> And many powerpc subarches don't have, nor does m68k or spar
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 10:48:10PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> Well, Christoph, i have trouble understanding all this religiuous anti
> patch problem. As in the case of the Marvell driver, what is the problem
> in having the patch as is available to debian/unstable users, _WHILE_ we
> are working o
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 02:10:52PM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 01:52:51PM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> >> There's no agenda behind this; I merely suspected it being a bad
> >> interaction with whatever's being used to manage device nodes, since
> >> from t
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 07:38:14PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 01, 2004 at 04:25:22PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Well, if you would go out of your x86-centric world, you would know that
> > half if not more of the architectures debian support _DON'T_ have text
> > console. You
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 10:46:00PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> Willian, could you enlighten us of the possible future standard that is
> emerging for future kernels ? As well as how they will fit into this,
> especially given the sarge release schedule which is again on track ?
What exactly does b
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 07:36:06PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 01, 2004 at 11:37:53AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > Two: The official Debian kernel is modularized to a great extent. On
> > > i386, all framebuffer drivers and framebuffer console support itself
> >
> > This is b
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 10:43:20PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > The /dev/psaux situation seems to be a big mess. I added /dev/psaux
> > upstream long ago so I wouldn't have to change my XF86Config for 2.4
> > vs 2.6. In the meantime X can have two different input devices
> > specified and won't
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 07:33:23PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 09:37:22AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > I probably don't disagree, i only disagree with the dictatorial method,
> > while this was supposed to be a team.
>
> If a team needs to discuss every little bit of
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 01:52:51PM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
>> There's no agenda behind this; I merely suspected it being a bad
>> interaction with whatever's being used to manage device nodes, since
>> from the above, it doesn't appear to be the kernel itself having trouble.
On Sat, Ju
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 07:30:35PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 08:32:43AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Notice that Christoph did close this bug report without even bothering
> > to discuss this, thus taking the decision from the team and into his own
> > hands. Christ
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 10:55:09PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Fri, Jul 02, 2004 at 03:32:55PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> >> Its also quite off the mark for amd64. The last kerel version had a 0 Byte
> >> patch for amd64 and
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 01:52:51PM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 11:54:03AM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> >> Unless we've got a counterexample to its superfluity dropping it sounds
> >> like the way to go. The weird thing is Sven's going on about device nodes
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 07:04:22PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 27, 2004 at 09:55:46PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 27, 2004 at 05:29:38PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > There's a few reports against 2.4 kernel that are fixed in 2.6 and are
> > > unlikely to get
Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Jul 02, 2004 at 03:32:55PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Its also quite off the mark for amd64. The last kerel version had a 0 Byte
>> patch for amd64 and only the current one has some patches in there to
>> fix recent bugs.
>
> So wh
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 07:06:30PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > So, i am seriously considering dropping all 2.4 powerpc kernels, and
> > going with 2.6 only, and would like to get feedback both from
> > debian-kernel as well as debian-powerpc, feedback i didn't get in the
> > past.
>
> I'd
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 11:54:03AM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
>> Unless we've got a counterexample to its superfluity dropping it sounds
>> like the way to go. The weird thing is Sven's going on about device nodes'
>> names/locations. Sven, what's setting up your device nodes?
On Sat, Jul
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 07:40:49PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 02, 2004 at 03:32:55PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > Its also quite off the mark for amd64. The last kerel version had a 0 Byte
> > patch for amd64 and only the current one has some patches in there to
> > fix
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 11:54:03AM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 08:19:07AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> >> For example, i know that the XF86Config-4 file needs to be changed when
> >> using a ps2 mouse, since it was /dev/psaux previously, and is
> >> /dev/input/mice
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 07:17:08PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 08:19:07AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > For example, i know that the XF86Config-4 file needs to be changed when
> > using a ps2 mouse, since it was /dev/psaux previously, and is
> > /dev/input/mice now. Br
Per Olofsson wrote:
On Thu, Jul 01, 2004 at 20:35 -0300, Robin Blondon wrote:
Actually, before I tried beta4 I tried tc1, and with both the 2.4 and
2.6 kernels the laptop locked up hard ealy in the boot process around
the point where the message "Setting up filesystem, please wait ..." is
pri
Per Olofsson wrote:
On Thu, Jul 01, 2004 at 10:29 -0300, Robin Blondon wrote:
In addition, the network setup that I had working with 2.4 no longer
works with 2.6. I get errors with trying to load module memory_cs, which
doesn't exist. It looks like it is now trying to identify my wireless
LAN
On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 08:19:07AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
>> For example, i know that the XF86Config-4 file needs to be changed when
>> using a ps2 mouse, since it was /dev/psaux previously, and is
>> /dev/input/mice now. Breaking X during the upgrade is hardly acceptable
>> if we are going to m
Package: kernel-source-2.6.7
Version: 2.6.7-2
Severity: important
Justification: fails to build from source
Attempting to build a slightly customized 2.6.7 kernel with built in support
for IDE, as well as necessary hardware for booting.
When doing a 'make-kpkg kernel_image modules_image', the com
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 08:01:20PM +0200, Thibaut VARENE wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Jul 2004 19:12:54 +0200
> Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > parisc:
> > seems to be fine in general but IIRC some features are still
> > missing
>
> Wrong. Unless you define SMP as "some features"
On Sat, 3 Jul 2004 19:12:54 +0200
Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> parisc:
> seems to be fine in general but IIRC some features are still
> missing
Wrong. Unless you define SMP as "some features".
parisc is _not ready_ to move to 2.6.
--
Thibaut VARENE
The PA/Linux ESI
On Thu, Jul 01, 2004 at 07:32:13PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> I intent to adopt the kernel-patch-usagi package.
>
> I think I will atleast need to split it up in 2 packages, one for
> 2.4 and one for 2.6. So I'd get kernel-patch-usagi-2.4 and and
> kernel-patch-usagi-2.6.
>
> Or should I make a
On Fri, Jul 02, 2004 at 03:32:55PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Its also quite off the mark for amd64. The last kerel version had a 0 Byte
> patch for amd64 and only the current one has some patches in there to
> fix recent bugs.
So what exact problems does the patch you propose solve? Wh
On Thu, Jul 01, 2004 at 04:25:22PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> Well, if you would go out of your x86-centric world, you would know that
> half if not more of the architectures debian support _DON'T_ have text
> console. You mean we should provide a null modem cable and a laptop with
> every debian
> I'd like to know how a modularized PCI subsystem can be loaded _AFTER_
> a PCI dependent FB driver.
> What then if the PCI buswalk kills the kernel?
The PCI subsystem is initialized before VESAFB even in the built-in
case.
On Thu, Jul 01, 2004 at 11:37:53AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Two: The official Debian kernel is modularized to a great extent. On
> > i386, all framebuffer drivers and framebuffer console support itself
>
> This is bullshit. I don't think it is a great idea to modularize the
> kernel, and thu
On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 09:37:22AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> I probably don't disagree, i only disagree with the dictatorial method,
> while this was supposed to be a team.
If a team needs to discuss every little bit of work it's much less
effective then a single person doing the actual work. G
On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 03:28:21AM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote:
> He didn't close it; he tagged in +wontfix. He mentioned his reasoning
> (the fact that there's userspace graphical boot screens), but it's not
> apparent due to the way the BTS works. FYI, Christoph, people will
> usually email @bu
On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 08:32:43AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> Notice that Christoph did close this bug report without even bothering
> to discuss this, thus taking the decision from the team and into his own
> hands. Christoph, could you please justify your actions here ? They may
> be right and a
On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 12:13:41PM +0200, Marco Amadori wrote:
> The kernel patch is small, the userspace is trival and the media space is 1%
> of e.g. kde-artworks eye candy stuff.
The kernel patch adds a full jpeg decoder and adds horrible hooks to the
console subsystem, the fbdev subsystem and
On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 09:34:45AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> So, we should immeditely remove all the extraneous patches, and ship
> only the pristine upstream source ?
If you want to add a patch it should at least
a) do one thing not be a resync with some random repository
b) have a changel
On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 08:19:07AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> For example, i know that the XF86Config-4 file needs to be changed when
> using a ps2 mouse, since it was /dev/psaux previously, and is
> /dev/input/mice now. Breaking X during the upgrade is hardly acceptable
> if we are going to make
On Tue, Jun 29, 2004 at 12:31:52PM +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-06-27 17:29]:
> > There's a few reports against 2.4 kernel that are fixed in 2.6 and
> > are unlikely to get in 2.4 every (Examples: #146956 or #130217).
> > How should we deal with the
> So, i am seriously considering dropping all 2.4 powerpc kernels, and
> going with 2.6 only, and would like to get feedback both from
> debian-kernel as well as debian-powerpc, feedback i didn't get in the
> past.
I'd be in favour of that.
> Ah, and i am seriously considering dropping support fo
On Sun, Jun 27, 2004 at 09:55:46PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 27, 2004 at 05:29:38PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > There's a few reports against 2.4 kernel that are fixed in 2.6 and are
> > unlikely to get in 2.4 every (Examples: #146956 or #130217). How should
> > we deal with
On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 03:10:36PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 03:09:09PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Ah, thanks for mentioning it, i will forward this info to Nicolas DET,
> > but he will probably not have time to review this before next week, nor
> > will i. The in
64 matches
Mail list logo
