My iwlagn (intel 5100) is also broken. Worked with 2.6.32-2, broken with
2.6.32-3, same as the atheros, same as the ralink rt61. Seems something
changed between -2 and -3 that took out pretty much all wifi cards.
I am running amd64 in case it matters.
I can't even begin to guess which of the ver
From: Jan Ceuleers
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2009 10:36:03 +0100
> Jan Ceuleers wrote:
>> I have successfully booted a 2.6.32.2 kernel with this patch applied on top
>> on a PXE-booting machine with nfsroot.
>
> Obviously this was on a machine with a Via Velocity NIC.
Fair enough, applied to net-2.6,
Just wanted to try to clear up some things. Enabling this option does
not break backward compatibility in any way.
* Everything that originally did not work in lenny continues to not work
(like the Xorg synaptics driver with this touchpad.)
* Everything that did work continues to work and is com
Package: linux-source-2.6.30
Version: 2.6.30-8squeeze1
Severity: important
I already wrote all of this up once!!
This bug pertains to the fact that my AMD64 machine will not boot up past
perhaps 1/3 of the way into the GUI window manager in Xwindow. What happens is
that the screen shuts off com
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> tags 563605 moreinfo
Bug #563605 [linux-2.6] linux-image-2.6.32-trunk-amd64: Intel VT flags missing
on Q45 chipset
Added tag(s) moreinfo.
>
End of message, stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking
On Mon, 2010-01-04 at 00:39 +, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> Package: linux-2.6
> Version: 2.6.32-3
> Severity: normal
>
> I don't seem to have the CPU flags for Intel virtualisation from the processor
> to run KVM, Xen and friends.
How did you determine this? Can you send the contents of /pro
Package: linux-2.6
Version: 2.6.32-3
Severity: normal
I don't seem to have the CPU flags for Intel virtualisation from the processor
to run KVM, Xen and friends. I double-checked the BIOS and virtualisation
is enabled (it's a Q45 chipset with a Core2Duo E7400 processor, and a recent
BIOS).
I'm ha
On Sunday 03 January 2010, dann frazier wrote:
> Thanks. This suggests that the fixes for CVE-2009-0029 are causal. To
> verify, can you test this kernel which drops only those fixes?
>
> zelenka.debian.org:~dannf/linux-headers-2.6.18-6-s390_2.6.18.dfsg.1-26et
>ch1+nocve20090029_s390.deb
s/header
On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 11:26:34AM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 04:55:27PM +1100, Brian May wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 01:21:55AM +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > I believe we will have Xen hypervisor and Linux dom0 packages, but they
> > > will not be supported to
Your message dated Mon, 4 Jan 2010 00:23:29 +0100
with message-id <20100103232329.gc4...@stro.at>
and subject line Re: missing ROOT uuid link
has caused the Debian Bug report #548290,
regarding linux-image-2.6.30-2-686: 2.6.30 cannot find root file system
to be marked as done.
This means that you
On Sat, Jan 02, 2010 at 11:19:41PM +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Saturday 02 January 2010, you wrote:
> > Can you try:
> > zelenka.debian.org:~dannf/linux-image-2.6.18-6-s390_2.6.18.dfsg.1-26etch
> >1+div64_s390.deb
>
> Linux version 2.6.18-6-s390 (Debian 2.6.18.dfsg.1-26etch1+div64)
> [...]
> Fail
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reassign 548290 initramfs-tools
Bug #548290 [linux-image-2.6.30-2-686] linux-image-2.6.30-2-686: 2.6.30 cannot
find root file system
Bug reassigned from package 'linux-image-2.6.30-2-686' to 'initramfs-tools'.
>
End of message, stopping processin
On Mon, 2009-11-16 at 14:23 +0100, Thomas Douillard wrote:
> The 2.6.31-1-686 kernel is now on unstable (the bug is attributed to
> the wrong kernel, if the architecture is involved), so I installed it,
> and the result is always the same ...
I'm sorry we didn't respond to this message sooner.
Th
On Sun, 2010-01-03 at 04:58 -0800, Bart Massey wrote:
> My backup system is built entirely around the cryptoloop module, and I
> have no real interest in re-engineering it. In my application, the
> weakness referred to in CVE-2004-2135 is largely irrelevant. I'm not
> sure what "cryptoloop doesn
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> # The programs running on top of a kernel are not unrelated
> severity 559035 important
Bug #559035 [linux-image-2.6.26-2-xen-amd64] linux-image-2.6.26-2-xen-amd64:
Random segfaults with lenny amd64 kernel
Severity set to 'important' from 'critic
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> # makes unrelated software on the system break, please fix this for stable
> severity 559035 critical
Bug #559035 [linux-image-2.6.26-2-xen-amd64] linux-image-2.6.26-2-xen-amd64:
Random segfaults with lenny amd64 kernel
Severity set to 'critical'
- "Gabor Gombas" wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 06:31:20PM +0200, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
>
> > So the change has happened, lthough it took painfully long to get
> the
> > upstream Linux pv_ops framework in shape and all that.. and
> obviously
> > the pv_ops dom0 patches still need to get
- "Marc Haber" wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Jan 2010 16:55:27 +1100, Brian May
> wrote:
> >Like I said previously, I think dropping Xen support is a mistake
> because KVM
> >requires QEMU and QEMU seems to have a reputation of being insecure.
>
> Xen is unsupportable due to clueless upstream, who ha
On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 06:31:20PM +0200, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> So the change has happened, lthough it took painfully long to get the
> upstream Linux pv_ops framework in shape and all that.. and obviously
> the pv_ops dom0 patches still need to get merged upstream.
That was opposed quite stro
On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 07:33:07PM +0100, Gabor Gombas wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 06:31:20PM +0200, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
>
> > So the change has happened, lthough it took painfully long to get the
> > upstream Linux pv_ops framework in shape and all that.. and obviously
> > the pv_ops dom0
On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 11:23:28AM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 01:21:55AM +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > I believe we will have Xen hypervisor and Linux dom0 packages,
>
> The hypervisor works well, but the Linux Dom0 packages are not available
> yet, upstream is again f
On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 10:46:38AM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Jan 2010 16:55:27 +1100, Brian May
> wrote:
> >Like I said previously, I think dropping Xen support is a mistake because KVM
> >requires QEMU and QEMU seems to have a reputation of being insecure.
>
> Xen is unsupportable due
My backup system is built entirely around the cryptoloop module, and I have
no real interest in re-engineering it. In my application, the weakness
referred to in CVE-2004-2135 is largely irrelevant. I'm not sure what
"cryptoloop doesn't work with journaling filesystems" is supposed to mean;
it h
Package: powertop
Version: 1.11-1
Severity: wishlist
don't know why the svn from august isn't tarballed yet,
but maybe upstream can clear that? :)
newer powertop beside some smaller fixes has now
much better wireless support for recent linux-2.6.
please upload soon so that it reaches Sqeeze.
tha
Package: linux-2.6
Hi,
On Dec 24, Filippo Giunchedi wrote:
> it would be nice to have tomoyo enabled, userspace tools are in the archive
> already.
To make tomoyo enabled is nice but userspace tool is not in the arhice yet ;)
tomoyo-ccstools is for tomoyo patched version, it's not exactly sa
On Sun, 3 Jan 2010 16:55:27 +1100, Brian May
wrote:
>Like I said previously, I think dropping Xen support is a mistake because KVM
>requires QEMU and QEMU seems to have a reputation of being insecure.
Xen is unsupportable due to clueless upstream, who has been in a
constant FAIL state regarding s
On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 04:55:27PM +1100, Brian May wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 01:21:55AM +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > I believe we will have Xen hypervisor and Linux dom0 packages, but they
> > will not be supported to the degree that ordinary kernel packages are.
> I can't see any Xen ke
On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 01:21:55AM +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> I believe we will have Xen hypervisor and Linux dom0 packages,
The hypervisor works well, but the Linux Dom0 packages are not available
yet, upstream is again fading behind.
Bastian
--
What kind of love is that? Not to be loved;
On Sun, 3 Jan 2010, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> It does require virtualisation extensions, but most x86 processors sold in
> the last few years have them.
My SE Linux Play Machine is currently running on a P3-800 system with 256M of
RAM. I would like to continue running on that hardware until someon
29 matches
Mail list logo
