On jeu., 2011-09-01 at 05:21 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> As I wrote on #605090:
>
> Without the strict check, the crap code produces a compile-time warning
> and a run-time warning and *no copying*. With the strict check, the
> crap code results in FTBFS (but only on i386 and s390!). So how is
From: Ben Hutchings
Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2011 04:45:34 +0100
> So anyway, this CPU doesn't implement popc and is wrongly being detected
> as doing so.
I posted a fix for this already yesterday and it's in Linus's tree
and queued up in Greg's -stable tree as well:
>From 1a8e0da5937a6c87807083baa318
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> tags 639949 + patch
Bug #639949 [linux-2.6] linux-image-3.0.0-1-sparc64-smp: Kernel fails to boot
with illegal instruction on ultrasparc V240
Added tag(s) patch.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
63
On Thu, 2011-09-01 at 00:26 -0400, David Miller wrote:
> From: Ben Hutchings
> Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2011 04:45:34 +0100
>
> > So anyway, this CPU doesn't implement popc and is wrongly being detected
> > as doing so.
>
> I posted a fix for this already yesterday and it's in Linus's tree
> and queued
On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 15:45 +0200, Witold Baryluk wrote:
> Package: linux-2.6
> Version: 3.0.0-3
> Severity: important
>
> I was booting about 10 times on this kernel and didn't have this issues.
> Also I had no problem with my hardware.
>
> When I was in the middle of boot process, and when gdm3
On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 17:52 +0200, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> Package: linux-2.6
> Version: 3.0.0-3
> Severity: wishlist
>
> Hey,
>
> this was already asked as part of #605090 but I had the impression that
> opening a bug was needed since people were aware, but I was wrong.
>
> So here's a wishl
On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 18:33 +0200, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> Ok, here's an updated patchset.
>
> Tarball can be found at
> http://molly.corsac.net/~corsac/debian/kernel-grsec/grsec-patches.tar.xz
> (and already extracted in grsec-patches/ folder).
>
> It's a folder with a quilt patche series
>
On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 20:43 +0200, Thorsten Giese wrote:
> Am 31.08.2011 14:48, schrieb Ben Hutchings:
> > On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 14:36 +0200, Thorsten Giese wrote:
> >> Am 31.08.2011 14:09, schrieb Ben Hutchings:
> I think I found a performance issue in the kernel (2.6.32/amd64) of the
>
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> tags 639949 + upstream
Bug #639949 [linux-2.6] linux-image-3.0.0-1-sparc64-smp: Kernel fails to boot
with illegal instruction on ultrasparc V240
Added tag(s) upstream.
> forwarded 639949 da...@davemloft.net
Bug #639949 [linux-2.6] linux-image-3.0
On Thu, 2011-09-01 at 00:38 +0200, Sebastien Bernard wrote:
> Package: linux-2.6
> Version: 3.0.0-3
> Severity: important
>
> Dear Maintainer,
> Kernel fails to boot on my V240 dual processor ultrasparc machine. It does
> not boot at all. Last kernel known to work
> is 2.6.39.
>
> I join to the
Package: linux-2.6
Version: 3.0.0-3
Severity: important
Dear Maintainer,
Kernel fails to boot on my V240 dual processor ultrasparc machine. It does not
boot at all. Last kernel known to work
is 2.6.39.
I join to the but report the output of the boot capture through the serial port.
-- Package-
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 11:08:30PM +0200, Thibault Manlay wrote:
> On 29/08/11 04:44, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> > Nice. Have you found which item in the .config caused it?
>
> Found it.
>
> Issue comes from "CONFIG_LOCKUP_DETECTOR=y" (issue disappears when
> unsetting it).
>
> But why would this
On 29/08/11 04:44, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Nice. Have you found which item in the .config caused it?
Found it.
Issue comes from "CONFIG_LOCKUP_DETECTOR=y" (issue disappears when
unsetting it).
But why would this option/feature "locks-up" the system?
--
Thibault Manlay
signature.asc
Descr
Accepted:
linux-2.6_3.1.0~rc4-1~experimental.1.diff.gz
to main/l/linux-2.6/linux-2.6_3.1.0~rc4-1~experimental.1.diff.gz
linux-2.6_3.1.0~rc4-1~experimental.1.dsc
to main/l/linux-2.6/linux-2.6_3.1.0~rc4-1~experimental.1.dsc
linux-2.6_3.1.0~rc4.orig.tar.gz
to main/l/linux-2.6/linux-2.6_3.1.0~
Your message dated Wed, 31 Aug 2011 18:49:04 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#639538: fixed in linux-2.6 3.1.0~rc4-1~experimental.1
has caused the Debian Bug report #639538,
regarding de4x5 is obsolete
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
Your message dated Wed, 31 Aug 2011 18:49:04 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#639439: fixed in linux-2.6 3.1.0~rc4-1~experimental.1
has caused the Debian Bug report #639439,
regarding reportbug script fails on s390: no PCI bus
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the pro
Your message dated Wed, 31 Aug 2011 18:49:04 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#639113: fixed in linux-2.6 3.1.0~rc4-1~experimental.1
has caused the Debian Bug report #639113,
regarding linux-image-3.0.0-1-486: please enable various OLPC drivers
to be marked as done.
This means that you c
Your message dated Wed, 31 Aug 2011 18:49:04 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#638696: fixed in linux-2.6 3.1.0~rc4-1~experimental.1
has caused the Debian Bug report #638696,
regarding FTBFS on alpha; GPIO config is insane
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem
Your message dated Wed, 31 Aug 2011 18:49:04 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#627655: fixed in linux-2.6 3.1.0~rc4-1~experimental.1
has caused the Debian Bug report #627655,
regarding linux-image-2.6.39-1-686-pae: missing NFS4.1 / pNFS support
to be marked as done.
This means that you c
Your message dated Wed, 31 Aug 2011 18:49:04 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#618261: fixed in linux-2.6 3.1.0~rc4-1~experimental.1
has caused the Debian Bug report #618261,
regarding linux-2.6: Please enable CONFIG_FB_UDL on all architectures
to be marked as done.
This means that you c
Am 31.08.2011 14:48, schrieb Ben Hutchings:
> On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 14:36 +0200, Thorsten Giese wrote:
>> Am 31.08.2011 14:09, schrieb Ben Hutchings:
I think I found a performance issue in the kernel (2.6.32/amd64) of the
squeeze release.
I tested from different servers and each
W dniu 27 sierpnia 2011 07:38 użytkownik Jonathan Nieder
napisał:
> So: did I guess correctly (i.e., was this fixed by 2.6.39)? :)
>
> What would actually be useful to know is the version number of some
> recent (e.g., 3.0.x) kernel that exhibits or does not exhibit the
> problem. Hopefully the l
Wednesday, August 31, 2011 1:22 PM Will Set wrote:
>
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=627019
> I have two i865 mobos D865GRH, D865PERLK that both have trouble booting
> 2.6.39
> and 3.0.0 kernels
> Yes
> Len Brown suggested workaround
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.
The problem reappears with bittorrent downloading and laptop is frozen and
the clock drifts.
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 8:46 PM, Jose Luis Salas wrote:
> I used cpufrequtils 007-2 in both setups, and cpu scaling is working like a
> charm. I need jiffies in 2.6.32 for avoiding clock drift ( and free
Tuesday, August 30, 2011 5:59 PM wzab wrote:
> I found this bug, when I was looking for solution for my problem related to
> the
> newest kernels and a machine based on D865GBF motherboard.
I have two i865 mobos D865GRH, D865PERLK that both have trouble booting 2.6.39
and 3.0.0 kernels
> I
reassign 639861 linux-2.6 3.0.0-1
kthxbye
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 01:58:59 +0100, cfr wrote:
> Package: xserver-xorg-video-nouveau
> Version: 1:0.0.16+git20110411+8378443-1+b1
> Severity: normal
>
>
> There is no control of the backlight with the nouveau drivers on a 12"
> Aluminium G4 PowerBoo
Ok, here's an updated patchset.
Tarball can be found at
http://molly.corsac.net/~corsac/debian/kernel-grsec/grsec-patches.tar.xz
(and already extracted in grsec-patches/ folder).
It's a folder with a quilt patche series
* 01_support-linux-3.0.patch
This is unrelated but needed to support linux3
On mer., 2011-02-23 at 13:36 +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> On mer., 2011-01-26 at 14:54 +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > > > >
> > http://git.debian.org/?p=collab-maint/linux-grsec-base.git;a=summary
> > > if
> > > > > needed.
> > > > Why is this not part of the patch below?
> > > The grsec.conf
Package: linux-2.6
Version: 3.0.0-3
Severity: wishlist
Hey,
this was already asked as part of #605090 but I had the impression that
opening a bug was needed since people were aware, but I was wrong.
So here's a wishlist bug. Could DEBUG_STRICT_USER_COPY_CHECKS be
enabled?
It's used to enforce c
Hello Moritz,
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 03:58:27PM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> We're including attached patch in Univention Corporate Server, a Debian
> derived Distribution based on Stable.
happy to do so if newer busybox no longer spits at one face on
invocation aka if that is resolved:
ht
Package: initramfs-tools
Version: 0.92o.20.200909212352
Severity: minor
Tags: patch
Hi Maks,
We're including attached patch in Univention Corporate Server, a Debian derived
Distribution based on Stable.
Subjects says it all. Please consider merging.
Cheers,
Moritz
diff -aur initramfs-too
Package: linux-2.6
Version: 3.0.0-3
Severity: important
I was booting about 10 times on this kernel and didn't have this issues.
Also I had no problem with my hardware.
When I was in the middle of boot process, and when gdm3 just started
starting (Xorg already started, blanked screen, and showed
On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 14:13 +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 01:39:20PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > Since Linux 3.x is a continuation of the 2.6.x series and not a major
> > change, there was no need to create a new source package for it.
> > However, we should now rename th
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 01:39:20PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> Since Linux 3.x is a continuation of the 2.6.x series and not a major
> change, there was no need to create a new source package for it.
> However, we should now rename the source package to 'linux'.
>
> Currently, most of our bugs a
On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 14:36 +0200, Thorsten Giese wrote:
> Am 31.08.2011 14:09, schrieb Ben Hutchings:
> >> I think I found a performance issue in the kernel (2.6.32/amd64) of the
> >> squeeze release.
> >>
> >> I tested from different servers and each time made a wget of a 16 MB
> >> file from a r
Hi
On Wednesday 31 August 2011, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-08-12 at 21:55 +0200, Stefan Lippers-Hollmann wrote:
> > On Friday 12 August 2011, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2011-08-01 at 19:36 -0300, Willian Gustavo Veiga wrote:
[...]
> > Given that the licensing for carl9170fw is a b
Since Linux 3.x is a continuation of the 2.6.x series and not a major
change, there was no need to create a new source package for it.
However, we should now rename the source package to 'linux'.
Currently, most of our bugs are assigned to 'linux-2.6' or
'src:linux-2.6' so that version-tracking wo
Am 31.08.2011 14:09, schrieb Ben Hutchings:
>> I think I found a performance issue in the kernel (2.6.32/amd64) of the
>> squeeze release.
>>
>> I tested from different servers and each time made a wget of a 16 MB
>> file from a remote co-location which is connected with gigabit (but the
>> issue s
On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 12:30 +0200, Thorsten Giese wrote:
> Hello there,
>
> I think I found a performance issue in the kernel (2.6.32/amd64) of the
> squeeze release.
>
> I tested from different servers and each time made a wget of a 16 MB
> file from a remote co-location which is connected with
Hello there,
I think I found a performance issue in the kernel (2.6.32/amd64) of the
squeeze release.
I tested from different servers and each time made a wget of a 16 MB
file from a remote co-location which is connected with gigabit (but the
issue showed also on a 32MBit/s "dial-up" cable connec
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> # Julian Gilbey wrote:
> #
> # > 3.0.0-3 also crashed on me
> found 636103 linux-2.6/3.0.0-3
Bug #636103 [linux-2.6] linux-image-2.6.39-2-amd64: repeatedly crashes: general
protection fault, perhaps connected to ata2?
Bug #631187 [linux-2.6] Kern
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 06:31:58PM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> forcemerge 631187 636103
> tags 631187 + upstream
> quit
>
> Hi Julian,
>
> Julian Gilbey wrote:
>
> > ata2.00: detaching (SCSI 1:0:0:0)
> > BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 0068
> > IP: [] elv
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 07:25:58AM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
> On 08/30/2011 06:16 AM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> > I concur with Sean Finney that nfs-utils should Build-Depend on
> > libnfsidmap-dev >= 0.24 to ease backporting.
> >
> > I'm hoping to prepare nfs-utils 1.2.4 as a backport for squee
Actually it doesn't seem to be the same problem then. If you read the post I
linked previously "Dave" clearly state that his symptoms does not happen when
intel_idle is compiled "out". In my case intel_idle is not included and it
still hangs on wakeup.
--
Lars
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On Tue, 2011-08-30 at 10:22 -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> It might make sense to also use 'xen_raw_printk' as sometimes you don't
> get to see the panic - you end up with this unhelpfull message:
>
> (XEN) domain_crash_sync called from entry.S
> (XEN) Domain 0 (vcpu#0) crashed on cpu#0:
Hi Lars,
Lars Boegild Thomsen wrote:
> Someone here:
>
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1186275
>
> mentioned that booting with intel_idle.max_cstate=0 worked on his S10-3. I
> just tried that with the Debian kernel and that did NOT work for me.
Yes, Debian kernels do not include
(resending to new address)
Hi,
Sorry for the long silence.
The Anarcat wrote:
> Today I had a very special issue with my workstation. The display would
> start but freeze. Even though in the back things are still happening,
> the display isn't updated and the only way out is to go to TTY1
> (con
Someone here:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1186275
mentioned that booting with intel_idle.max_cstate=0 worked on his S10-3. I
just tried that with the Debian kernel and that did NOT work for me. However,
I don't know if that is because the ACPI sleep is not included in Debian (
The problem reported as bug 631597 was worked around by booting with
"processor.nocst=1" parameter (solution was found in
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727865 thread).
Does it solve also 63274 and 630031 bugs?
This is only a workaround. The real problem is probably somewhere in th
49 matches
Mail list logo
