Horms wrote:
Debian isn't lowering priority on Linux 2.4 work but individual people
are.
I am one of the people who do work on 2.4 for debian,
I won't raise the hands of others.
Personally my focus is 2.4.27, because that is what will go
into sarge and right now I don't have the time to do
2.4.2
Accepted:
kernel-headers-2.6.10-1-386_2.6.10-3_i386.deb
to
pool/main/k/kernel-image-2.6.10-i386/kernel-headers-2.6.10-1-386_2.6.10-3_i386.deb
kernel-headers-2.6.10-1-686-smp_2.6.10-3_i386.deb
to
pool/main/k/kernel-image-2.6.10-i386/kernel-headers-2.6.10-1-686-smp_2.6.10-3_i386.deb
kernel-hea
* Norbert Tretkowski wrote:
> * Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > +- smbfs-overflow-fixes.dpatch
> > ++ smbfs-overflow-fixes-2.dpatch
>
> The new patch doesn't apply:
>
> --> 2.6.10-3 fully applied.
> smbfs-overflow-fixes.dpatch OK (-)
> smbfs-overflow-fixes-2.dpatch
before compiling.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.10-20050109
Locale: LANG=en_US, LC_CTYPE=en_US (charmap=ISO-8859-1)
Versions of packages kernel-source-2.6.10 depends on:
ii
* Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> +- smbfs-overflow-fixes.dpatch
> ++ smbfs-overflow-fixes-2.dpatch
The new patch doesn't apply:
--> 2.6.10-3 fully applied.
smbfs-overflow-fixes.dpatch OK (-)
smbfs-overflow-fixes-2.dpatch OK (+)
1 out of 2 hunks FA
I'm seeing the same problem on my Toshiba Satellite Pro 4360.
Switching to the other kernel I have available (2.4.18) speeds it
back up.
On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 19:01:38 +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> Hi,
>
> A few months ago, I asked on this list for more informative
> description of patches enabling non-kernel hackers to choose
> individual patchsets for their local kernels. Unfortunately, that
> question was denied pretty fast. Looks l
* Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > + static int __init init_ext3_fs(void)
> > + {
> > + int err = init_ext3_xattr();
> > ++
> > ++ /* fix for oops */
> > ++ printk(KERN_ERR "[%d] init_ext3_fs(), err = %d\n", __LINE__, err);
>
> urgg, this is not a fix but a hack. Should look more like:
>
>
On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 03:56:48PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 20:41:41 +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 08:25:33PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> >> Agreed. The package is not a repository for cherrypicking patches
> >> but intended to used as a whole
On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 20:41:41 +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 08:25:33PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> Agreed. The package is not a repository for cherrypicking patches
>> but intended to used as a whole thing.
>
> I am pretty disappointed about that attitude towards your u
On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 08:52:59PM +0100, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
> Cherrypicking makes little sense, because there are only cherries. :-)
For my systems, I care about security holes being fixed, but I do not
care about some obscure video hardware, or additional features. So
"Cherry" is relative.
Gr
Rejected: Rejected: kernel-image-power3-smp_2.6.9-2_powerpc.deb: old version
(100) in unstable >= new version (2.6.9-2) targeted at unstable.
Rejected: Rejected: kernel-patch-powerpc-2.6.9_2.6.9-2_all.deb: old version
(2.6.9-3) in unstable >= new version (2.6.9-2) targeted at unstable.
Rejected:
Marc Haber wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 08:25:33PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > Agreed. The package is not a repository for cherrypicking patches
> > but intended to used as a whole thing.
>
> I am pretty disappointed about that attitude towards your users. What
> exactly is the problem
Marc Haber wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 07:40:06PM +0100, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
> > I think the effort to do so is better invested elsewhere. As a
> > general rule, the kernel team strives to keep the debian-specific
> > patches to a minimum. For people without in-depth kernel knowledge
> > it's
On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 07:36:47PM +, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 08:33:51PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> > Actually, the kernel of my dreams is more near to the vanilla
> > kernel.org kernel, so I'd like to be able to throw out patches that
> > you need to apply because of yo
On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 08:33:51PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> Actually, the kernel of my dreams is more near to the vanilla
> kernel.org kernel, so I'd like to be able to throw out patches that
> you need to apply because of your _much_ broader user base.
>
> otoh, I would like to run a 2.6.10 ker
On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 08:25:33PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Agreed. The package is not a repository for cherrypicking patches
> but intended to used as a whole thing.
I am pretty disappointed about that attitude towards your users. What
exactly is the problem with a little more docs to _a
On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 07:40:06PM +0100, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
> I think the effort to do so is better invested elsewhere. As a
> general rule, the kernel team strives to keep the debian-specific
> patches to a minimum. For people without in-depth kernel knowledge
> it's probably best to take the f
On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 07:40:06PM +0100, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
> I think the effort to do so is better invested elsewhere. As a
> general rule, the kernel team strives to keep the debian-specific
> patches to a minimum. For people without in-depth kernel knowledge
> it's probably best to take the f
> + static int __init init_ext3_fs(void)
> + {
> + int err = init_ext3_xattr();
> ++
> ++/* fix for oops */
> ++printk(KERN_ERR "[%d] init_ext3_fs(), err = %d\n", __LINE__, err);
urgg, this is not a fix but a hack. Should look more like:
/* ugly hack to work around compil
I am also seeing this on "pinhead", an IBM Thinkpad T20, when trying
to upgrade to kernel-image-2.6.8-2-686 (version 2.6.8-11). I'm using
encrypted swap with the cryptsetup package.
The kernel package installation attempt looks like this:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] dkg]$ sudo apt-get install kernel-imag
Marc Haber wrote:
> Hi,
>
> A few months ago, I asked on this list for more informative
> description of patches enabling non-kernel hackers to choose
> individual patchsets for their local kernels. Unfortunately, that
> question was denied pretty fast. Looks like you guys don't have time
> to wri
Hi,
A few months ago, I asked on this list for more informative
description of patches enabling non-kernel hackers to choose
individual patchsets for their local kernels. Unfortunately, that
question was denied pretty fast. Looks like you guys don't have time
to write more extensive docs.
cleanup
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 11:13:06 +0100, Juan Cespedes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Tue, Dec 14, 2004 at 05:37:41PM +0100, Juan Cespedes wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 14, 2004 at 08:03:15AM -0800, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> >I disagree. People who want the bare vmlinux can use the
>> > configuration opt
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 17:37:41 +0100, Juan Cespedes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Tue, Dec 14, 2004 at 08:03:15AM -0800, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> > Being able to inspect the kernel variables and the kernel content
>> > with:
>> >> gdb /boot/vmlinux /proc/kcore
>>
>> I disagree. People who want
On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 03:24:26PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 02:53:17PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > At least as far as d-i is concerned (AFAICT), you have to put LVM on top
> > > of an existing partition table; you can't just use the full /dev/sda or
> > > wh
Package: kernel-image-2.4.27-1-686
Version: 2.4.27-6
Severity: normal
Hello,
At the start of the computer, i've got some errors (that i haven't got with a
2.6 kernel).
Here is a copy of the problem form /var/log/kernel
Jan 9 15:57:56 localhost kernel: pci_hotplug: PCI Hot Plug PCI Core versio
On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 02:53:17PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > At least as far as d-i is concerned (AFAICT), you have to put LVM on top
> > of an existing partition table; you can't just use the full /dev/sda or
> > whatever. (The command-line lets you get around this).
> Yikes. The a st
On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 08:49:54AM -0500, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
> Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
> >Best thing for > 2TB disks is to use LVM anyway
>
> At least as far as d-i is concerned (AFAICT), you have to put LVM on top
> of an existing partition table; you can't just use the full /dev/sda
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
Best thing for > 2TB disks is to use LVM anyway
At least as far as d-i is concerned (AFAICT), you have to put LVM on top
of an existing partition table; you can't just use the full /dev/sda or
whatever. (The command-line lets you get around this).
However, even if you do
Accepted:
kernel-build-2.6.8-power3-smp_2.6.8-9_powerpc.deb
to
pool/main/k/kernel-patch-powerpc-2.6.8/kernel-build-2.6.8-power3-smp_2.6.8-9_powerpc.deb
kernel-build-2.6.8-power3_2.6.8-9_powerpc.deb
to
pool/main/k/kernel-patch-powerpc-2.6.8/kernel-build-2.6.8-power3_2.6.8-9_powerpc.deb
kernel
Your message dated Sun, 09 Jan 2005 08:02:24 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#287933: fixed in kernel-patch-powerpc-2.6.8 2.6.8-9
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 th
kernel-patch-powerpc-2.6.8_2.6.8-9_powerpc.changes uploaded successfully to
localhost
along with the files:
kernel-patch-powerpc-2.6.8_2.6.8-9.dsc
kernel-patch-powerpc-2.6.8_2.6.8-9.tar.gz
kernel-headers-2.6.8_2.6.8-9_powerpc.deb
kernel-image-2.6.8-power3_2.6.8-9_powerpc.deb
kernel-build
Check here if your message above does not load.
No man or woman who tries to pursue an ideal in his or her own way is without enemies. -Daisy Bates (1863-1951) Ahir
Does Joe hate laughing over there? aventurine
About life breadman
Those janitors aren't missing sleeping right now. Baluga
Gerd,
do you plan to ever polish and submit the scsi changer driver for
mainline inclusion?
We've been carring it along with the Debian kernel for a while, but
it looks pretty much like a dead end currently.
On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 03:42:43AM +0100, S?ren Hansen wrote:
> l??r, 08 01 2005 kl. 19:35 +0100, skrev Christoph Hellwig:
> > When merging to 2.6.10 I noticed we have a bunch of smbfs changes that
> > were labelled security fixes. Can you try to rebuild the kernel (or
> > just smbfs.ko) with the
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> unmerge 284181
Bug#284181: alsa-modules-2.4.27-1-686: plenty of unresolved symbols
Bug#284253: debian-installer: [netboot-x86] there is a module versioning issue
in 2.6 and 2.4 netboot images.
Bug#284356: incompatability with modules from -2 version of
(new) kernel-headers-2.6.10-1-386_2.6.10-3_i386.deb optional devel
Linux kernel headers 2.6.10 on 386
This package provides kernel header files for version 2.6.10 on 386,
for sites that want the latest kernel headers.
Please read /usr/share/doc/kernel-headers-2.6.10-1/debian.README.gz for
detai
kernel-image-2.6.10-i386_2.6.10-3_i386.changes uploaded successfully to
localhost
along with the files:
kernel-image-2.6.10-i386_2.6.10-3.dsc
kernel-image-2.6.10-i386_2.6.10-3.tar.gz
kernel-headers-2.6.10-1_2.6.10-3_i386.deb
kernel-headers-2.6.10-1-686-smp_2.6.10-3_i386.deb
kernel-image-
Alright, I've uploaded 2.6.10 source and i386 packages. They can be
obtained here:
http://www.acm.rpi.edu/~dilinger/kernel-source-2.6.10/
http://www.acm.rpi.edu/~dilinger/kernel-image-2.6.10-i386/
Looks like I *just* missed some NEW processing, too. Oh well..
Accepted:
kernel-doc-2.6.10_2.6.10-3_all.deb
to pool/main/k/kernel-source-2.6.10/kernel-doc-2.6.10_2.6.10-3_all.deb
kernel-patch-debian-2.6.10_2.6.10-3_all.deb
to
pool/main/k/kernel-source-2.6.10/kernel-patch-debian-2.6.10_2.6.10-3_all.deb
kernel-source-2.6.10_2.6.10-3.diff.gz
to pool/main/
Your message dated Sun, 09 Jan 2005 01:17:37 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#288062: fixed in kernel-source-2.6.10 2.6.10-3
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 cas
kernel-source-2.6.10_2.6.10-3_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
kernel-source-2.6.10_2.6.10-3.dsc
kernel-source-2.6.10_2.6.10-3.diff.gz
kernel-patch-debian-2.6.10_2.6.10-3_all.deb
kernel-source-2.6.10_2.6.10-3_all.deb
kernel-tree-2.6.10_2.6.10-3_all.deb
43 matches
Mail list logo
