On Fri, 23 Sep 2005 08:22:31 +0200
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is m32r a separate architecture at all ?
Yes. Original architecture by Mitsubishi, it's now Renesas Technology.
> Debian doesn't yet have archive support for it, does it ?
Yes, we have. I mean, dpkg and other
On Fri, Sep 23, 2005 at 02:43:25PM +0900, NIIBE Yutaka wrote:
> Package: linux-2.6
> Severity: wishlist
> Tags: patch
>
> Could you please include following changes in the next release?
>
> I've just joined the debian-kernel mailing list, and I learned
> recent direction of debian-kernel. If I u
Package: linux-2.6
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch
Could you please include following changes in the next release?
I've just joined the debian-kernel mailing list, and I learned
recent direction of debian-kernel. If I understand correctly,
linux-2.6 is the source package of all images (and sourc
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> forwarded 322729
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-pcmcia/2005-September/002723.html
Bug#322729: i82365 driver trouble?
Noted your statement that Bug has been forwarded to
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-pcmcia/2005-September/002
On Fri, Sep 23, 2005 at 12:56:48AM +0200, Miernik wrote:
> Package: kernel
> Followup-For: Bug #259031
>
> When I try to run fbtv I get this:
>
> jaworz:~# fbtv -v
> using linux console font "/usr/share/consolefonts/lat1-16.psf.gz"
> ioctl FBIOGET_CON2FBMAP: Invalid argument
> jaworz:~#
>
> fbtv
Package: kernel
Followup-For: Bug #259031
When I try to run fbtv I get this:
jaworz:~# fbtv -v
using linux console font "/usr/share/consolefonts/lat1-16.psf.gz"
ioctl FBIOGET_CON2FBMAP: Invalid argument
jaworz:~#
fbtv version 3.94-1.0
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
AP
Accepted:
kernel-build-2.4.27-apus_2.4.27-11_powerpc.deb
to
pool/main/k/kernel-patch-powerpc-2.4.27/kernel-build-2.4.27-apus_2.4.27-11_powerpc.deb
kernel-build-2.4.27-nubus_2.4.27-11_powerpc.deb
to
pool/main/k/kernel-patch-powerpc-2.4.27/kernel-build-2.4.27-nubus_2.4.27-11_powerpc.deb
kernel
kernel-patch-powerpc-2.4.27_2.4.27-11_powerpc.changes uploaded successfully to
localhost
along with the files:
kernel-patch-powerpc-2.4.27_2.4.27-11.dsc
kernel-patch-powerpc-2.4.27_2.4.27-11.tar.gz
kernel-patch-2.4.27-apus_2.4.27-11_powerpc.deb
kernel-headers-2.4.27-apus_2.4.27-11_powerpc.
Your message dated Thu, 22 Sep 2005 23:07:04 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#329671: kernel-image-2.6-amd64-k8-smp: Kernel image in the
intel x86 port is appears to be compiled in 64bit mode.
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that y
Hello,
On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 04:51:27PM +0100, Guy Coates wrote:
> I've installed Sarge x86 on a opteron system. When changing the
> kernel from
>
> kernel-image-2.6.8-2-686-smp
> to
> kernel-image-2.6-amd64-k8-smp
>
> the machine architecture as reported by uname changes:
>
> When running
On Sep 22, Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > Please check if this bug has been fixed by 2.6.13, on my system the four
> > extra ttyS devices which were claimed by serial8250 are gone.
> I'll be sure to do this. 2.6.13 isn't in unstable yet though, is it?
It's n
Marco d'Itri wrote:
> Please check if this bug has been fixed by 2.6.13, on my system the four
> extra ttyS devices which were claimed by serial8250 are gone.
I'll be sure to do this. 2.6.13 isn't in unstable yet though, is it?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "
Hi,
I've experienced the same problems this evening.
After restarted the system, I got the following which is part of the boot log:
/-
md: bind
md: bind
raid1: raid set md0 active with 2 out of 2 mirrors
XFS mounting filesystem md0
Ending clean XFS mount for filesystem: md0
On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 11:30:25AM +0900, Horms wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2005 at 01:31:37PM +0300, Nikos Ntarmos wrote:
> > Package: kernel-source-2.4.27
> > Version: 2.4.27-11.hls.2005082200
> > Severity: important
> > Justification: fails to build from source
> >
> > Patch 143_outs.diff.bz2 bre
On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 03:36:01PM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote:
> Ok, looks like people seem to want python more; I'll start rewriting
> my tools to be in python, and working on the common lib stuff.
Make sure to write a one paragraph in the "split-config howto for the dumbs"
kind though.
Friendl
Ok, looks like people seem to want python more; I'll start rewriting
my tools to be in python, and working on the common lib stuff.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> found 321508 2.6.12-6
Bug#321508: oops loading ide-generic with 2.6.12 kernel in d-i
Bug marked as found in version 2.6.12-6.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(admin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi there.
On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 11:30:25AM +0900, Horms wrote:
> The problem that you see is a patch that was included in 2.4.27-11
> (the current version in sid), though it isn't built for amd64.
>
> Could you see if the following patch works for
Package: kernel-image-2.6-amd64-k8-smp
Version: 103
Severity: important
I've installed Sarge x86 on a opteron system. When changing the
kernel from
kernel-image-2.6.8-2-686-smp
to
kernel-image-2.6-amd64-k8-smp
the machine architecture as reported by uname changes:
When running kernel-image
Accepted:
kernel-image-2.6-386_2.6.12-7_i386.deb
to pool/main/l/linux-2.6/kernel-image-2.6-386_2.6.12-7_i386.deb
kernel-image-2.6-686-smp_2.6.12-7_i386.deb
to pool/main/l/linux-2.6/kernel-image-2.6-686-smp_2.6.12-7_i386.deb
kernel-image-2.6-686_2.6.12-7_i386.deb
to pool/main/l/linux-2.6/kern
Your message dated Thu, 22 Sep 2005 05:17:30 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#322734: fixed in linux-2.6 2.6.12-7
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 message dated Thu, 22 Sep 2005 05:17:30 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#328534: fixed in linux-2.6 2.6.12-7
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 message dated Thu, 22 Sep 2005 05:17:30 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#328324: fixed in linux-2.6 2.6.12-7
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 message dated Thu, 22 Sep 2005 05:17:30 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#323724: fixed in linux-2.6 2.6.12-7
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 message dated Thu, 22 Sep 2005 05:17:30 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#323724: fixed in linux-2.6 2.6.12-7
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 message dated Thu, 22 Sep 2005 05:17:30 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#323724: fixed in linux-2.6 2.6.12-7
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
On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 03:10:47PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> Could you please send your reply to the bug,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Oops, didn't realize Reply-To wasn't set. Here it is:
On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 12:34:59AM -0400, Joe Mason wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 12:20:52PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> >
linux-2.6_2.6.12-7_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
linux-2.6_2.6.12-7.dsc
linux-2.6_2.6.12-7.diff.gz
linux-doc-2.6.12_2.6.12-7_all.deb
linux-patch-debian-2.6.12_2.6.12-7_all.deb
linux-source-2.6.12_2.6.12-7_all.deb
linux-tree-2.6.12_2.6.12-7_all.deb
kernel-image-2.6-386_2.6.12-7_i386.deb doesn't exist
kernel-image-2.6-686_2.6.12-7_i386.deb doesn't exist
kernel-image-2.6-686-smp_2.6.12-7_i386.deb doesn't exist
kernel-image-2.6-k7_2.6.12-7_i386.deb doesn't exist
kernel-image-2.6-k7-smp_2.6.12-7_i386.deb doesn't exist
Due to the errors above, the
Package: initrd-tools
Version: 0.1.82
Severity: normal
If I am in /boot and I run mkinitrd -o foo 2.4.27, then I expect it to
output to a file foo in the current directory. Instead it writes the
output file somewhere inside the temporary tree, which is deleted when
mkinitrd exits. Only if I run it
Horms wrote:
> Ok, that makes sense. Let me know if the build completes and if so
> I'll add it to the tree.
Build completed. Kernel seems ok.
--
see shy jo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 09:55:24AM +0200, Joey Hess wrote:
> Horms wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 08:10:10AM +0200, Joey Hess wrote:
> > > Here's the best patch I've been able to find for this so far.
> >
> > This is completely weird, any ideas why this hasn't shown up before?
>
> Apparently
Horms wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 08:10:10AM +0200, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Here's the best patch I've been able to find for this so far.
>
> This is completely weird, any ideas why this hasn't shown up before?
Apparently it's known breakage caused by the new binutils that I guess
only just rea
On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 07:51:46AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 11:34:30AM +0900, Horms wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 17, 2005 at 09:21:05PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > On Sat, Sep 17, 2005 at 07:49:06PM +0100, Paul Brossier wrote:
> > > > the culprit was CONFIG_FB_NVIDIA, which
34 matches
Mail list logo
