Below is a list of open 2.4 bug reports. It would be great if porters
could look for bugs on their arch, check if those bugs still aply to
2.6 and then reassign or close them.
kernel-image-2.4.27-2-sparc32: 281511 327432 376771
281511: normal: kernel-image-2.4.26-sparc32: kernel paging request oo
Your message dated Thu, 24 Aug 2006 00:05:40 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line fixed in etch
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 responsibility to re
Your message dated Thu, 24 Aug 2006 00:04:56 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line fixed in 2.6
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 responsibility to reo
Hi,
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 02:48:58PM -0600, dann frazier wrote:
> heh - nothing passive-aggressive intended in my message, just making
> sure it wasn't an accident :)
ok ;)
> btw, did you see my note #381951 about the additional space
> requirements for that option? fjp was asking joeyh's opin
Your message dated Thu, 24 Aug 2006 00:04:18 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line removed
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 responsibility to reopen t
Your message dated Thu, 24 Aug 2006 00:02:55 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed
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 responsibility to reopen t
Your message dated Thu, 24 Aug 2006 00:02:55 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed
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 responsibility to reopen t
Hello,
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 11:23:54AM -0600, dann frazier wrote:
> > - [ Kyle McMartin ]
> > - * Apply patch to fix pa8800 (mostly...)
>
> hey Frederik,
> Did you mean to remove Kyle's comment, or was that a typo?
I did mean to remove it, in preparation for the release we wanted to
make
tags 384318 wontfix
thanks
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 08:03:41PM +0200, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-08-23 19:28]:
> > > fyi, the plan is to move etch to 2.6.17, so linux-2.6.16 will probably
> > > not be updated much, if at all.
> > According to the PTS, 2.6.17
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 384318 wontfix
Bug#384318: missing OSS drivers
There were no tags set.
Tags added: wontfix
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database
* Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-08-23 19:28]:
> > fyi, the plan is to move etch to 2.6.17, so linux-2.6.16 will probably
> > not be updated much, if at all.
> According to the PTS, 2.6.17 won't migrate to testing automaticaly because of
> the freeze. Isn't that at odds with the plan to u
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 08:50:15AM -0400, Dykema, Erik wrote:
> 1) The AMD64 arch (which would be preferrable in this case as the processor
> is emt64 capable) is
> not built using the 2.6.17 kernel, so I had to use the i386 arch.
It looks like 2.6.17 udebs are in sid for amd64, but d-i is not y
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 11:11:48AM -0600, dann frazier wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 03:19:50PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> > Package: linux-2.6.16
> > Severity: normal
> >
> > It seems that all OSS drivers have been disabled in this version. 2.6.17
> > brought them back, but they're still m
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 01:55:56PM +, Frederik Sch??ler wrote:
> Author: fs
> Date: Wed Aug 23 13:55:55 2006
> New Revision: 7232
>
> Modified:
>dists/sid/linux-2.6/debian/arch/i386/config
>dists/sid/linux-2.6/debian/changelog
>
> Log:
> Activate EFI boot support on i386.
...
> Modifi
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 03:19:50PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> Package: linux-2.6.16
> Severity: normal
>
> It seems that all OSS drivers have been disabled in this version. 2.6.17
> brought them back, but they're still missing in 2.6.16. Please could you
> reenable them?
fyi, the plan is to
You can consider this bug work-arounded if you use the panic=0 boot
parameter. Getting a timeout would then reboot the machine thus giving a
retry (although a bit slower).
Cheers,
Tim.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTE
Greetings again, (please scroll down)
On Tue, 2006-06-20 at 13:59 -0400, Adam C Powell IV wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-06-20 at 18:16 +0200, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
> > On Mon, 19 Jun 2006 the mental interface of
> > Adam C Powell IV told:
> >
> > > reassign 357236 linux-image-2.6.16-2-686
> > > forwa
Package: linux-2.6.16
Severity: normal
It seems that all OSS drivers have been disabled in this version. 2.6.17
brought them back, but they're still missing in 2.6.16. Please could you
reenable them?
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (50
Hi-
Dann's suggestion to install with the daily build worked, excepting
two issues:
1) The AMD64 arch (which would be preferrable in this case as the
processor is emt64 capable) is not built using the 2.6.17 kernel, so
I had to use the i386 arch.
2) Even though the installer runs the .1
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 376652 linux-2.6
Bug#376652: linux-image-2.6.17-1-686: high speed USB fails to work (ehci_hcd)
Warning: Unknown package 'linux-image-2.6.17-1-686'
Bug reassigned from package `linux-image-2.6.17-1-686' to `linux-2.6'.
> --
Stopping processing
Your message dated Wed, 23 Aug 2006 05:17:06 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#380649: fixed in initramfs-tools 0.76
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 n
Your message dated Wed, 23 Aug 2006 05:17:06 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#383730: fixed in initramfs-tools 0.76
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 n
Your message dated Wed, 23 Aug 2006 05:17:06 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#383908: fixed in initramfs-tools 0.76
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 n
Your message dated Wed, 23 Aug 2006 05:17:06 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#384063: fixed in initramfs-tools 0.76
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 n
Hi again.
I have compared debian patches from 2.6.16-1 and 2.6.16-2 and I think
that I found the cause to not work usb 2.0 .
In 2.6.16.17 revision, it was included a patch:
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/ChangeLog-2.6.16.17
[PATCH] VIA quirk fixup, additional PCI IDs
http://www.ke
Hi
Thanks for all the answers.
The reason for the question was that they wanted to focus on one
version in order to get that working nicely.
An other related question is how you see on make openvz kernel binaries
released in Debian. It would be nice to have such binary kernels just
as vserver hav
initramfs-tools_0.76_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
initramfs-tools_0.76.dsc
initramfs-tools_0.76.tar.gz
initramfs-tools_0.76_all.deb
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsub
Accepted:
initramfs-tools_0.76.dsc
to pool/main/i/initramfs-tools/initramfs-tools_0.76.dsc
initramfs-tools_0.76.tar.gz
to pool/main/i/initramfs-tools/initramfs-tools_0.76.tar.gz
initramfs-tools_0.76_all.deb
to pool/main/i/initramfs-tools/initramfs-tools_0.76_all.deb
Override entries for yo
Dann-
Thanks for the suggestion, am downloading the ISO's as we speak and
will give it a shot immediately.
regards,
Erik
On Aug 22, 2006, at 7:41 PM, dann frazier wrote:
hey Erik,
Since beta3 d-i has moved to using a 2.6.17 kernel, can you give one
of the daily snapshots a test to see i
hello ola,
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 12:38:00PM +0200, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
>
> I got a question from the openvz upstream people on which version
> of the kernel that will be released as the version in etch. Do you
> know if it will be 2.6.17 or if any later version may be used?
> Assuming that t
* Ola Lundqvist ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060823 12:55]:
> I got a question from the openvz upstream people on which version
> of the kernel that will be released as the version in etch. Do you
> know if it will be 2.6.17 or if any later version may be used?
> Assuming that the release date sometime in
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 12:38:00PM +0200, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
> Hi
>
> I got a question from the openvz upstream people on which version
> of the kernel that will be released as the version in etch. Do you
> know if it will be 2.6.17 or if any later version may be used?
> Assuming that the releas
Hi
I got a question from the openvz upstream people on which version
of the kernel that will be released as the version in etch. Do you
know if it will be 2.6.17 or if any later version may be used?
Assuming that the release date sometime in december still holds.
Thanks in advance,
// Ola
--
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 384294 linux-2.6
Bug#384294: Kernel ops while backup to USB HD
Warning: Unknown package 'kernel-image'
Bug reassigned from package `kernel-image' to `linux-2.6'.
> --
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian
Package: kernel-image
Version: 2.6.8-16sar
i got an kernel ops in the night. i think its has to do with the backup via
rsync to an USB HD
please tell me if you want more info. Thank you.
log from kern.log:
Aug 19 05:01:08 intranet kernel: Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer
dereference at virt
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 10:40:59AM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
>> On Wednesday 23 August 2006 07:24, Steve Langasek wrote:
>> > So is updating linux-2.6 in testing *before* updating grub-installer
>> > sufficient?
>
>> Yes, that is how I understand it from
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 11:58:20PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 02:12:43 -0700, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
>> >> - grub-installer would have a change to don't use full paths in
>> >> kernel-img.conf entries _but
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 10:40:59AM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Wednesday 23 August 2006 07:24, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > So is updating linux-2.6 in testing *before* updating grub-installer
> > sufficient?
> Yes, that is how I understand it from Otavio.
> Therefore, no objections from d-i POV.
A
On Wednesday 23 August 2006 07:24, Steve Langasek wrote:
> So is updating linux-2.6 in testing *before* updating grub-installer
> sufficient?
Yes, that is how I understand it from Otavio.
Therefore, no objections from d-i POV.
pgp8o7FSKfkSn.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Your message dated Wed, 23 Aug 2006 09:46:44 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#384274: Xorg won't start with ATI Radeon driver and
framebuffer
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If t
tags 380649 pending
stop
hello vagrant,
On Sun, 20 Aug 2006, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> of course, patches also available in bzr branch:
>
> http://llama.freegeek.org/~vagrant/bzr-archives/initramfs-tools/vagrant-initramfs-tools
implemented the 0.76 nfsroot parsing based on that branch.
you ma
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 03:18:04PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> Ever since the sarge release, an ongoing question has been: what do the DFSG
> require for works that are not "programs" as previously understood in
> Debian? Several rounds of general resolutions have now given us an
42 matches
Mail list logo
