On (14/07/06 14:04), Chris Phillips wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am compiling my own kernel from kernel.org sources (+ patches) and creating
> a kernel-image package using:
>
>> make-kpkg clean
>> fakeroot make-kpkg --initrd --revision=1.0 kernel_image kernel_headers
>
> As I am playing around wi
Hi,I am compiling my own kernel from kernel.org sources (+ patches) and creating a kernel-image package using: > make-kpkg clean > fakeroot make-kpkg --initrd --revision=1.0 kernel_image kernel_headersAs I am playing around with a number of different kernel patches (bigphysarea, web100, custom
Hi,I am currently running about 12 PCs with Sarge across the country. On each machine I am running a "kernel.org" kernel (+custom patches) AND need to compile a out-of-tree module for these kermels.I basically download a tarball from kernel.org, (2.6.16.24 most recently), patch as appropriate then
FYI: The status of the initramfs-tools source package
in Debian's testing distribution has changed.
Previous version: 0.60
Current version: 0.68b
--
This email is automatically generated; [EMAIL PROTECTED] is responsible.
See http://people.debian.org/~henning/trille/ for more information.
Accepted:
linux-headers-2.6-amiga_2.6.17-3_m68k.deb
to pool/main/l/linux-2.6/linux-headers-2.6-amiga_2.6.17-3_m68k.deb
linux-headers-2.6-mac_2.6.17-3_m68k.deb
to pool/main/l/linux-2.6/linux-headers-2.6-mac_2.6.17-3_m68k.deb
linux-headers-2.6.17-1-all-m68k_2.6.17-3_m68k.deb
to pool/main/l/lin
linux-2.6_2.6.17-3_m68k.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
linux-headers-2.6.17-1-all_2.6.17-3_m68k.deb
linux-headers-2.6.17-1-all-m68k_2.6.17-3_m68k.deb
linux-headers-2.6.17-1_2.6.17-3_m68k.deb
linux-image-2.6.17-1-amiga_2.6.17-3_m68k.deb
linux-headers-2.6.1
* Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-07-13 15:20]:
> Also, nslu2 is not really a mainstream arch that justifies delaying
> everything. This seems like a too small issue to have to rebuild for
> all arches to me.
Yeah, I agree. Furthermore, the nslu2 requires a non-free ethernet
driver so I have
linux-2.6_2.6.17-3_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
linux-headers-2.6.17-1-all_2.6.17-3_i386.deb
linux-headers-2.6.17-1-all-i386_2.6.17-3_i386.deb
linux-headers-2.6.17-1_2.6.17-3_i386.deb
linux-image-2.6.17-1-486_2.6.17-3_i386.deb
linux-headers-2.6.17-
Accepted:
kernel-image-2.6-386_2.6.17-3_i386.deb
to pool/main/l/linux-2.6/kernel-image-2.6-386_2.6.17-3_i386.deb
kernel-image-2.6-686-smp_2.6.17-3_i386.deb
to pool/main/l/linux-2.6/kernel-image-2.6-686-smp_2.6.17-3_i386.deb
kernel-image-2.6-686_2.6.17-3_i386.deb
to pool/main/l/linux-2.6/kern
* Aurelien Jarno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-07-13 15:55]:
> I have reported the bug against the 2.6.16 version as I think it is
> important for the release. However if you plan to fix the bug later,
> fixing it in 2.6.17 is also ok for me. I am not sure my machine is fast
It's fixed in 2.6.17-3,
also sprach maximilian attems <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.01.24.1445 +0100]:
> where can i find your hook files?
> please attach them to this bug report, would be cool to clean that up.
>
> couldn't reproduce with simple
> sudo sh -c "> /usr/share/initramfs-tools/hooks/suspend2-2-6-14"
> sudo mkin
Your message dated Thu, 13 Jul 2006 06:49:19 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#377151: fixed in linux-2.6 2.6.17-3
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 case it is now
Your message dated Thu, 13 Jul 2006 06:49:19 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#377853: fixed in linux-2.6 2.6.17-3
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 case it is now
Frans Pop a écrit :
On Thursday 13 July 2006 00:34, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
Yeah, I just noticed that myself. :/ It does suck but I'm not sure
this is a RC bug. The kernel does work, sort of, after all... we're
trying to get beta3 out and I think the -boot team will kill me if
there has to be
linux-2.6_2.6.17-3_s390.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
linux-headers-2.6.17-1-all_2.6.17-3_s390.deb
linux-headers-2.6.17-1-all-s390_2.6.17-3_s390.deb
linux-headers-2.6.17-1_2.6.17-3_s390.deb
linux-image-2.6.17-1-s390_2.6.17-3_s390.deb
linux-headers-2.6.17
Accepted:
kernel-image-2.6-s390_2.6.17-3_s390.deb
to pool/main/l/linux-2.6/kernel-image-2.6-s390_2.6.17-3_s390.deb
kernel-image-2.6-s390x_2.6.17-3_s390.deb
to pool/main/l/linux-2.6/kernel-image-2.6-s390x_2.6.17-3_s390.deb
linux-headers-2.6-s390_2.6.17-3_s390.deb
to pool/main/l/linux-2.6/linu
linux-2.6_2.6.17-3_powerpc.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
linux-2.6_2.6.17-3.dsc
linux-2.6_2.6.17-3.diff.gz
linux-doc-2.6.17_2.6.17-3_all.deb
linux-manual-2.6.17_2.6.17-3_all.deb
linux-patch-debian-2.6.17_2.6.17-3_all.deb
linux-source-2.6.17_2.6.17-3_al
Accepted:
kernel-image-2.6-power3-smp_2.6.17-3_powerpc.deb
to pool/main/l/linux-2.6/kernel-image-2.6-power3-smp_2.6.17-3_powerpc.deb
kernel-image-2.6-power3_2.6.17-3_powerpc.deb
to pool/main/l/linux-2.6/kernel-image-2.6-power3_2.6.17-3_powerpc.deb
kernel-image-2.6-power4-smp_2.6.17-3_powerpc.d
There are disparities between your recently accepted upload and the
override file for the following file(s):
kernel-image-2.6-power3-smp_2.6.17-3_powerpc.deb: package says priority is
extra, override says optional.
kernel-image-2.6-power3_2.6.17-3_powerpc.deb: package says priority is extra,
ove
On Thursday 13 July 2006 00:34, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> Yeah, I just noticed that myself. :/ It does suck but I'm not sure
> this is a RC bug. The kernel does work, sort of, after all... we're
> trying to get beta3 out and I think the -boot team will kill me if
> there has to be another kernel
On 7/12/06, Thiemo Seufer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Bailey, Scott wrote:
> Funny this should come up now, just after my last note. I found a patch
> that looks better than mine in the report filed at
> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6275 by Ian Dall. Alas, it
> was posted in March an
Hi,
On Thursday 13 July 2006 05:45, Daniel Dickinson wrote:
> That is, not because I say so, but de facto, because it wouldn't have a
> bootable kernel for old world. Last week I upgraded the appropriate
> kernel bug (#375035) to grave (which makes it RC), which means the bug
> will be fixed, som
Package: initramfs-tools
Version: 0.68b
Severity: important
Tags: patch
The .deb's filesystem archive hasn't yet been unpacked when the preinst
runs, so you aren't allowed to depend upon directories shipped in the
.deb existing at that point. Patch attached.
It also occurs to me that this bug may
On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 10:43:33PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 01:30:13PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > That said, it is indeed logical to add spaces, and if so i don't understand
> > why it didn't work previously.
>
> | shift $(($OPTIND-1))
>
> Maybe more correct.
Yes,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Please ignore the last message; It
a) should have gone to control, and
b) It is unconfirmed (the success may have been with 2.6.15).
Must be less quick with bts...
- --
And that's my crabbing done for the day. Got it out of the way early,
now I ha
On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 10:08:09AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> I will revert the ia64 change as it does not follow the scheme for
> only-smp and I asked Dann to fix it some days ago.
And the i386 -bigmem flavours. They can be added if either xen images
come back or the ABI bump will come.
Basti
Hi folks
We have a trivialy exploitable bug in 2.6.17 which we need to fix ASAP
by updating to 2.6.17.4. I'd like to schedule to upload of 2.6.17-3 for
today 1200 UTC so that we have at least some of the builds done for
today dinstall.
I will revert the ia64 change as it does not follow the schem
27 matches
Mail list logo
