On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 07:58:33AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> SMP may be broken in some cases, and there is a (upto 20-30 % in some cases i
> hear) performance hit to it.
For i386. They have to invalidate the cache contents for each lock or
so.
> Now, with people pro
On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 07:50:38AM +1000, Andrew Pollock wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 10:53:30AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> >
> > If the kernel team would really like to handle issues like detecting
> > whether an i386 machine running a UP kernel is SMP, I'd be very happy
> > for the code for t
On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 10:53:30AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
>
> If the kernel team would really like to handle issues like detecting
> whether an i386 machine running a UP kernel is SMP, I'd be very happy
> for the code for that to move there. However, I don't think the 1:1
> subarch mapping you de
On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 05:45:54PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Sven Luther wrote:
> > Currently the modules are grouped per hand in .udebs, partly artificially,
> > partly because they belong to some wide group, and the dependencies are
> > handled by hand.
>
> THe above statement is incorrect. Rea
Sven Luther wrote:
> Which was a missing .udeb indeed
No it wasn't:
| Added nls_utf8 to fs-common-modules (Closes: #327891).
> introduced by a change in the hfsplus module, or by a change in d-i. That
> said, this is orthogonal to the issues discussed here. Also notice that if we
> had one-modu
Sven Luther wrote:
> Currently the modules are grouped per hand in .udebs, partly artificially,
> partly because they belong to some wide group, and the dependencies are
> handled by hand.
THe above statement is incorrect. Read
/usr/share/kernel-wedge/commands/copy-modules or even the documentati
On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 07:45:25PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> Which was a missing .udeb indeed, and quite bothersome. Not sure if it was
> introduced by a change in the hfsplus module, or by a change in d-i. That
> said, this is orthogonal to the issues discussed here. Also notice that if we
> had
On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 02:39:56PM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 07:45:25PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Which was a missing .udeb indeed, and quite bothersome. Not sure if it was
> > introduced by a change in the hfsplus module, or by a change in d-i. That
> > said, thi
On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 12:56:38PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Sven Luther wrote:
> > Nope, but i don't think there is a real problem in making d-i kernel
> > .udebs working for d-i, if said kernels already worked outside of d-i.
>
> It's odd that you say this when you have just finished tracking do
Sven Luther wrote:
> Nope, but i don't think there is a real problem in making d-i kernel
> .udebs working for d-i, if said kernels already worked outside of d-i.
It's odd that you say this when you have just finished tracking down
#327891, which is a perfect example of the kind of issue that can
On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 12:09:31PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Sven Luther wrote:
> > Mmm, why is this tripple need of holding udeb state necessary ?
>
> Well, look at the code to main-menu, anna, and udpkg..
Hehe, will do in Oldenbourg.
> > Would not solving this go a great way for diminishing g
Sven Luther wrote:
> Mmm, why is this tripple need of holding udeb state necessary ?
Well, look at the code to main-menu, anna, and udpkg..
> Would not solving this go a great way for diminishing general memory
> usage anyway ?
No, this is not the current high water mark for memory usage in d-i
On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 11:04:27AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/lib/debian/unstable>for d in *2.6.12*; do dpkg --contents
> $d; done |grep \.ko |wc -l
> 340
Does that include the missing modules like sata-uli, ahci, etc? Well at
least they were missing from the udeb building pac
On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 11:45:12AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 11:04:27AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> > > Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> > > > Well doing a list of the modules in the current linux-image-2.6.12 on
> > > > i386, and then deleting from the list so
Sven Luther wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 11:04:27AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> > > Well doing a list of the modules in the current linux-image-2.6.12 on
> > > i386, and then deleting from the list sound, and netfilter and anything
> > > else obviously not needed and p
On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 10:53:30AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Sven Luther wrote:
> > Is this not the moment to modify the way our kernel .udeb packages are
> > built,
>
> It's not a prerequisite for getting a working release of d-i for etch. I
> think our users are more interested in being able to
On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 11:04:27AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> > Well doing a list of the modules in the current linux-image-2.6.12 on
> > i386, and then deleting from the list sound, and netfilter and anything
> > else obviously not needed and probably a few things that wou
Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> Well doing a list of the modules in the current linux-image-2.6.12 on
> i386, and then deleting from the list sound, and netfilter and anything
> else obviously not needed and probably a few things that would be
> needed, I got down to just under 400 modules. Probably mos
Sven Luther wrote:
> Is this not the moment to modify the way our kernel .udeb packages are built,
It's not a prerequisite for getting a working release of d-i for etch. I
think our users are more interested in being able to install using the
new kernel.
> Also, i propose that we rename the kern
On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 03:56:07PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> We would only package those needed for the installer, we can list those in the
> .udebs actually, there should be around a 100 or so. multiplied by around 50
> flavours (maybe less) this brings us around 5000 packages.
>
> Well, we may
On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 10:26:55AM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 03:56:07PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > We would only package those needed for the installer, we can list those in
> > the
> > .udebs actually, there should be around a 100 or so. multiplied by around 50
>
On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 03:28:30PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> not sure i fully understand what you mean here. I guess you are saying you can
> kind of fix the b-i/kernel rules to install either linux-image or
> kernel-image, but that would be counter productive, now that we have some nice
> unifie
On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 09:46:32AM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 03:28:30PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > not sure i fully understand what you mean here. I guess you are saying you
> > can
> > kind of fix the b-i/kernel rules to install either linux-image or
> > kernel-i
On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 08:19:16AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> Is this not the moment to modify the way our kernel .udeb packages are built,
> and either use a single package building all .udebs or at least some common
> infrastructure for building them all if there is still problems in the
> archi
On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 09:18:55AM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 08:19:16AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > The next point would be for base-installer/kernel. I have thought about it
> > some, but me talking about that on irc faced only a huge wall of silence,
> > so i
> >
On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 10:50:58PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Well, 2.6.12 has finally made it into testing. I must confess I thought
> this would happen over one month before now, but now that it is, we have
> no excuse to not get a d-i beta out soon.
>
> There's still some work to do to switch d-
26 matches
Mail list logo
