On Sunday 13 November 2005 18:32, Jeff Bailey wrote:
> On dim, 2005-11-13 at 12:46 +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > I think it is possible at least for initramfs-tools to run without
> > sysfs on the building system.
>
> Right. The caveat to this is "dep" mode. The default mode for
> initramfs-too
On Sunday 13 November 2005 22:45, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 13, 2005 at 08:28:47PM +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
> > On Sunday 13 November 2005 08:16, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > That is less than 6MB of stuff, hardly "heavy". A single kernel
> > > flavour is dou
I've seen the same problem testing 2.6.14 kernel installation in Debian
Installer in vmware (running d-i with a 2.6.12 kernel).
The solution was to add "MODULE BusLogic" in /etc/yaird/Default.cfg.
It would be nice if a workaround for this could be added in yaird while
the driver is missing sysf
Package: yaird
Version: 0.0.11-12
Severity: minor
$ /usr/lib/yaird/exec/findlibs
findlibs: too many arguments (fatal)
This is obviously not the correct message. The usage message shown with
the -h option would IMO be more appropriate.
Wishlist: please support --help option besides -h
pgptAJoO
On Monday 14 November 2005 01:37, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Would it perhaps make sense to provide the yaird "findlibs" binary in a
> separate package for initramfs-tools to also use?
That looks promising.
For those who want to give it a try it without installing yaird ;-)
- http://people.debian.
On Monday 14 November 2005 21:47, Joey Hess wrote:
> This seems more in-scope for the kernel team to decide than the d-i
> team, but if it would help I can flip a coin..
Note that one consideration is consistency between Debian and Ubuntu in
d-i. Ubuntu have implemented initramfs-tools and in fac
On Tuesday 15 November 2005 13:23, Sven Luther wrote:
> Jonas, does it actually know how to look into /target/etc/fstab and not
> /etc/fstab ?
This of course is a completely irrelevant question as d-i runs the initrd
generators in a chroot on /target.
So, yes, effectively it _does_ look in /targe
Submitter reported additional information re initramfs-tools to d-s390
mailing list [1]. Most relevant information (console messages) duplicated
below.
Freeing unused kernel memory: 120k freed
Loading, please wait...
Begin: Initializing /dev ...
/sbin/udevsynthesize: 13: /lib/udev/udevsynthesize
On Friday 25 November 2005 09:11, Sven Luther wrote:
> And Frans, no, insulting porters and complaining they don't do their
> job is no way to get this solved, and i find joeyh remark that only 6
> d-i architectures support 2.6 kernels, while thanks to the common
> architecture, all debian official
On Sunday 27 November 2005 01:52, Roger Fernandes wrote:
> I have a simple question...
> where can i get the latest kernel-source-2.6.* package?
Look for linux-source. Packages were renamed starting from 2.6.12.
Cheers,
FJP
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsub
On Monday 28 November 2005 12:45, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> The following problems are known for yaird currently in sid:
Add:
* Does not work for drivers that don't have sysfs support, like BusLogic
> We do not have _automated_ workarounds, which it seems you imply and I
> clearly didn't above.
On Wednesday 30 November 2005 11:44, Maximilian Attems wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 06:22:17PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> > Ok, so I should just go ahead and put my patch into the 2.6.14 branch?
> > Or should we leave it as 2.6.15 probably isn't that far away... maybe
>
> depends if d-i will base it
Package: linux-2.6
Version: 2.6.14-4
Severity: serious
The following error happens on Debian Installer boot in vmware (386 kernel).
This problem was not present in -3.
The system does come up after the error, but it looks so basic (memory
management AFAICT) that I've set RC severity anyway.
Feel
On Wednesday 30 November 2005 16:06, Maximilian Attems wrote:
> better ntfs support, up2date ipw2XXX, vfs support "shared subtree",
> fbcon console rotation + usual bunch of fixes and driver upgrades.
> no acpi change.
Nothing that should give us problems I think. Thanks.
FB console rotation could
On Wednesday 30 November 2005 17:01, Maximilian Attems wrote:
[annoying footer blurb]
> wtf
> your message is public, keep away such strange footers.
> won't help your much.
Ppl sending from corporate mail accounts mostly cannot control such
footers. They are added by the mail servers after the
On Wednesday 30 November 2005 21:04, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Are there major changes from .14 to .15? If not, we should be able to
> > change over to .15 relatively fast.
>
> .15 will bring a non-negligible amount of change to powerpc, going from
> ARCH=ppc|ppc64 to ARCH=powerpc, which may entail mo
On Thursday 01 December 2005 00:09, Sven Luther wrote:
> Yeah, but the change from ARCH=ppc | ARCH=ppc64, to a single re-unified
> ARCH=powerpc kernel will not go without glitch, especially for the
> lesser subarches (oldworld, prep, apus come to mind), and may cause
> some sever disfunction in eve
On Saturday 03 December 2005 18:18, Colin Watson wrote:
> usplash works fine on x86/vga16fb, x86/vesafb, and powerpc/offb at
> least. It just uses bogl (like d-i) so it should be straightforward to
> port nearly anywhere.
What happens on sercon installations?
pgpGJjcoEh2vp.pgp
Description: PGP s
Package: initramfs-tools
Version: 0.41
Severity: important
After an installation test in vmware installing 2.6.14 and using
initramfs-tools, the system failed to boot.
Reason is that the driver mtpspi (./message/fusion/mptspi.ko) is missing
in the initrd.
Modules mptbase and mptscsih are prese
On Sunday 04 December 2005 11:18, Andreas Barth wrote:
> So, my question is: Is there some way to tell "everytime a new kernels
> appears at $location, please apply all patches in $directory, and
> compile it with this and that config for me"? If not, which would be
> the way to do this?
I would t
(CC to d-s390 as there may be people who can provide additional
information.)
On Friday 02 December 2005 22:58, you wrote:
> can you please retest if that device gets created?
OK. I've done some testing and made some progress.
First, the following modules need to be available in the initrd:
- d
Some additional info.
I've done my research from a system (Hercules emulator) running 2.4.27.
For 2.4.27, the dasd modules are built into the kernel. The option to set
the dasd devices is therefore passed from the zipl bootloader.
The "dasd=" option in the [debian_26] section was of course igno
Yesterday a lot of issues relevant for the sid_d-i images were fixed. This
means that today we have the first images without major issues using
2.6.14 (x86 and sparc64) after a few days without new CD builds.
I have tested netboot installations for both x86 (in vmware 5.5) and
sparc64. Both suc
Package: initramfs-tools
Version: 0.41
After a test in vmware installing 2.6.14-4-686 using initramfs-tools, the
system failed to reboot.
AFAICT the initrd (udev?) failed to load the BusLogic module even though
it is included in the initrd.
Note that BusLogic is known to be missing sysfs suppor
On Tuesday 06 December 2005 05:23, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> It's not kernel's fault. I have just booted the 2.6.14 off today's
> sid_d-i daily netinst, and it has the bug. The bug appears because the
> af_unix_init function is invoked twice, and it normally should not
> happen. This function is the in
2
[1] 2.6.14-2 does not boot on IA64, waiting for 2.6.15
NOTE
A new 2.4.27 kernel for x86 has just been accepted into unstable so 2.4 kernel
udebs will also need updating soon.
Cheers,
Frans Pop
pgpRvcHnLlHMI.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Package: initramfs-tools
Version: 0.42
Severity: important
After yaird failed to generate an image for the latest 2.6.14 kernel
(2.6.14-5), I tried initramfs-tools.
The initrd was generated, but the boot failed: /dev/hda1 not present.
The following modules were loaded correctly (from cat /proc/m
On Thursday 15 December 2005 17:55, dann frazier wrote:
> As far as I can tell, an ABI change only breaks d-i if it is
> incorporated into a point release - updates to security.debian.org
> should be safe.
Yes, that is correct. There is no problem for d-i until the new kernel
enters the main arch
On Monday 19 December 2005 22:54, Maximilian Attems wrote:
> currently d-i unstable uses 2.6.12/2.6.14 depending on arch -
> next beta is planed for 2.6.15 so latest 2.6.15 is more important.
OTOH the time to test with 2.6.15 will probably be quite short, so testing
d-i for hppa with 2.6.14 (usin
On Friday 23 December 2005 14:34, maximilian attems wrote:
> please try the attached patch,
> should load ide-generic even if udev didn't yet bring it up:
Although my initial report was for Sparc (which I will test tomorrow, I've
also tested it on my laptop.
ide-generic is loaded, but ide-disk is
On Saturday 24 December 2005 04:32, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Friday 23 December 2005 14:34, maximilian attems wrote:
> > please try the attached patch,
> > should load ide-generic even if udev didn't yet bring it up:
>
> Although my initial report was for Sparc (which I will
On Thursday 29 December 2005 02:48, maximilian attems wrote:
> could you try the attached hook file,
> please place it under
> /usr/share/initramfs-tools/scripts/init-premount/
The ide hook file in #344754 works for me on both my Sparc and laptop.
Cheers,
FJP
pgpNkM6YunuqH.pgp
Description: PGP
On Thursday 29 December 2005 13:04, Sven Luther wrote:
> To add to that the fact that with a minimal rebuild of support tools
> (yaird and backported udev for me), the etch/sid/experimental kernels
> install just fine on a sarge system. I run all my sarge systems like
> this, and it works just fine
(CC to d-kernel and yaird-devel for comments. Topic is a question in
Debian Installer regarding the initramfs generator to use.
For the start of the thread see:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2005/12/msg01228.html)
On Thursday 29 December 2005 09:07, Christian Perrier wrote:
> > by which
(Please do not CC me; I'm subscribed to all lists relevant here)
On Thursday 29 December 2005 16:34, Sven Luther wrote:
> I would have thought it the other way around, there is no reason to use
> initramfs-tools for a new install, since we are then not upgrading from
> 2.4 kernels.
That is not a
On Thursday 29 December 2005 17:27, Sven Luther wrote:
> What if we defaulted to yaird, we know that yaird, by design, will fail
> at install time and not at boot time, and give an error message, which
> we can grab and append to the log messages or whatever.
It does not in all cases, like for mod
On Thursday 29 December 2005 18:39, Ross Boylan wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 29, 2005 at 04:01:15PM +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
> > Here are the settings I propose to upload the new version of
> > base-installer with:
> > - Question asked at medium priority
> > - Default generator
On Friday 30 December 2005 02:46, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> I believe the non-failure with non-sysfs was a bug that got fixed in
> 0.0.12.
>
> Please test: To my knowledge yaird should now fail if not satisified
> with its findings (and drivers lacking sysfs support does not
> satisify!)
Sorry to
On Friday 30 December 2005 08:49, Sven Luther wrote:
> Still, now that Jonas confirmed yaird will fail in the presence of
> non-sysfs drivers, my initial proposal of trying out yaird and
> reverting to initramfs-tools if yaird can't produce a suitable ramdisk
> is again more interesting than your p
On Thursday 29 December 2005 21:49, Joey Hess wrote:
> Frans Pop wrote:
> > It also makes the installer independent of the default dependency set
> > in kernel-image packages.
>
> I'm not sure if this last is really an advantage. I'd rather leave the
> decision of
(forgot to CC d-kernel on this)
On Tuesday 03 January 2006 22:02, Sven Luther wrote:
> We will have a kernel which is outdated by two versions at release time
> with this plan, since there are about 1 kernel upstream release every 2
> month.
2.6.8 is not an optimal kernel, but largely due to timi
On Tuesday 03 January 2006 23:01, Sven Luther wrote:
> Indeed. The d-i team usually says "no" outright to any kind of proposal
> of this kind, so it is up to the kernel team to come up with an
> implementation which convinces them :)
Bullshit.
We (d-i team, mainly Joey) gave very good reasons why
On Tuesday 03 January 2006 23:52, Sven Luther wrote:
> The current proposal is about simply using the same .udeb organisation
> and move it inside the linux-2.6 common package, which is something
> that works out just fine for ubuntu even, but which the current
> linux-2.6 common package infrastruc
Package: initramfs-tools
Version: 0.48
The new option in Debian Installer to automatically partition using LVM
creates a system where / and most other partitions are on LVM, but /boot
is a separate "real" partition.
The initrd created using initramfs-tools fails to boot with this setup and
see
On Wednesday 11 January 2006 03:11, you wrote:
> can you say what was the exact boot failure?
> what where the last messages on the console..
SCSI, CDROM and USB have been loaded.
Begin: Mounting root file system...
Begin: Running /scripts/local-top
Done.
ALERT! /dev/mapper!Debian-root does not ex
retitle 347482 Does not support "!" separator in /dev/mapper names
severity 347482 important
thanks
On Wednesday 11 January 2006 03:44, you wrote:
> > what were the boot args?
> > cat /proc/cmdline
> root=/dev/mapper!Debian-root ro
>
> The problem seems to be in the "!". The lvm script expects "/"
On Wednesday 11 January 2006 20:25, maximilian attems wrote:
> * boot loader:
> grub | lilo (>= 19.1)
> grub is widely deployed by d-i and most actively used.
> lilo has almost no active dev.
> lilo isn't supported by xen.
grub still does not support some cases (mainly XFS on / IIRC) and in those
On Wednesday 11 January 2006 21:07, Maximilian Attems wrote:
> sorry for the confusion current suggest is "lilo (>= 19.1) | grub".
> i would propose to swith to the aboves named order, not drop.
Ack that.
pgpj4iOTyD7Hl.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Package: initramfs-tools
Version: 0.48
Severity: important
With new klibc, latest initramfs-tools and kernel 2.6.15-2, the system
fails to boot. It boots without problems if yaird is used to generate the
initrd. Not sure if this is a klibc problem or initramfs-tools.
Drivers look to be loaded O
reassign 349857 klibc
merge 349857 347902
thanks
On Wednesday 25 January 2006 18:51, Dave Love wrote:
> I get the following trying to boot on a v210:
> run-init: statfsKernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill init!
> /: error 22
I've seen the same error on my Sparc Ultra 10. The problem is
On Sunday 29 January 2006 00:51, Julien Louis wrote:
> I notice that xfs filesystem is unusable during installation, i've
> found in the log file those lines:
>
> Jan 28 20:55:24 modprobe: FATAL: Error inserting xfs
> (/lib/modules/2.6.14-2-parisc/kernel/fs/xfs/xfs.ko): Invalid module
> format
> Ja
On Sunday 29 January 2006 00:30, Holger Levsen [1] wrote:
> - it's not sensible to have powerpc and amd64 flavors, and probably
> others. So this kernel package will not be arch any. (Which is not
> really a problem, but unusual.)
Probably hppa, ia64 and also alpha won't need 2.4 f
On Monday 30 January 2006 03:29, Alexander Schmehl wrote:
> Wouldn't it then be possible then to drop D-I support for 2.4 and ask
> user to install the old kernel, if needed after the installation? At
> least if supporting 2.4 for D-I is getting to complicate...
Switching from 2.4 to 2.6 (and vic
On Sunday 05 February 2006 15:57, Holger Levsen wrote:
> hhpa has dropped 2.4 support for sarge... s390 also doesnt seem
> sensible.
2.6 support for S/390 has missing pieces (mainly hardware configuration
stuff). Waldi has been working on this recently, but a full switch to 2.6
is not yet an opt
On Monday 06 February 2006 22:25, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> > architecture.mk convert the architecture name in case the name in
> > Debian and the name in the kernel tree is different, which is the
> > case for powerpc (ppc), and hppa (parisc).
>
> Manoj, maybe you can take a look at the build fail
On Tuesday 07 February 2006 12:21, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> Do you understand that next year 2.4 kernels will probably not
> installable on a large fraction of the then current hardware?
This whole discussion is not about current hardware. It is specifically
about older hardware and about some archi
Allow me to wonder a bit about the way the last two kernel uploads were
handled.
- 2.6.15-5 was pushed because it solved a remote security issue
(CVE-2006-0454), however it was uploaded with urgency LOW
- next day, 2.6.15-6 that has a new upstream release is uploaded
Wouldn't it have made more
On Friday 10 February 2006 21:33, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Well, and let one vulnerable remote security update open for a day
> > more, this is not acceptable. Even if only one user gets compromised
> > because of this, then it is enough to warrant the upload.
Please read what I said. I did not say
reassign 352654 grub
tags 352654 + patch
severity 352654 serious
thanks
On Monday 13 February 2006 21:12, Frans Pop wrote:
> > ALERT! does not exist. Dropping to a shell!
>
> This is the real problem. It should have the name of the root device in
> that message.
>
> What
On Tuesday 14 February 2006 18:39, sdbteam wrote:
> i've had serious issues when installing the
> linux-image-2.6.15-1-686-smp (testing) on our production server. i
> don't know if it's because of udev or initramfs-tools but my lvm2
> partitions over a raid5 array didn't work anymore. i also had ma
On Wednesday 15 February 2006 00:19, you wrote:
> But as I read bug#352654 it concerns defining the _root_ device (which
> to my knowledge is the only device ever defined in the GRUB menu.lst
> file, so choking on LVM _device_ names in GRUB shouldn't relate
> to /boot).
No it does not relate to /b
exec of program /etc/initd.d/hdparm failed
IMO it would be good to suppress such messages as, in my experience, they
will only lead to unnecessary installation and bug reports.
maks suggested to re-add the "silence_exec_error" patch for Beta2 and
maybe come back to this issue
On Tuesday 14 February 2006 21:18, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > You may have been hit by http://bugs.debian.org/352654
>
> I suspect not - GRUB can read RAID1 devices only, not RAID5 AFAIK.
Hmm. Shouldn't it work if /root is on RAID but /boot is a separate normal
partition?
pgpklpWjmEfif.pgp
Des
(forgot to CC d-kernel; already sent to BR)
On Tuesday 14 February 2006 11:56, maximilian attems wrote:
> the faulty Xu patch was removed long ago,
> still lots of common intel/via hardware needs ide-generic.
> otherwise no ide driver is loaded for them.
Not quite correct: the driver (in my case
Marco,
Attached is the info you requested, at least I hope it is.
You asked for 'udevtest -a -p /sys/block/hdetc', but udevtest only gave me
systax errors or 'could not open file' errors. udevinfo did give a result
with those parameters, so I decided you probably mistyped.
If you actually want u
On Wednesday 15 February 2006 08:18, Sven Luther wrote:
> Ok, i guess you just volunteered for helping us investigate what really
> is happening here, and in particular why the piix driver cannot do it
> all by itself instead of the ide-generic driver ? Is this correct, that
> you would be willingt
On Wednesday 15 February 2006 23:33, Kamil Pawlowski wrote:
> I can't boot my system because /dev/hd* don't create, i must add
> copy_exec /lib/udev/ide.agent /lib/udev/
> to /usr/share/initramfs-tools/hooks/udev
> this might be error in packge?
This has already been solved in a new upload (today
On Wednesday 15 February 2006 23:48, Chris Searle wrote:
> I have no idea how to go about debugging this and of course - since it
> can't find the disks - no logs to look in :(
Please try the following at the shell prompt:
# modprobe ide-generic
# echo /dev/hda*
Are your partitions listed now? If
On Monday 06 March 2006 21:52, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> I recently updated to linux-image-2.6.15-1, and now I want to remove
> linux-image-2.6.14-2, but the postinst hangs reading from a pipe
> during the call to purge(). I'm presently in state "Config-files",
> and I don't know how to debug it furt
On Wednesday 08 March 2006 06:42, Blars Blarson wrote:
> Since the system isn't bootable it's hard to check the contents of
> that file.
You could try the rescue mode of the installer to get a chroot into your
root directory to generate a new initrd.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTE
On Tuesday 07 March 2006 18:43, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> I have startet a wiki page to document the ide-generic problem with the
> Linux kernel (and thus the ramdisk tools as well). The page is here:
> http://wiki.debian.org/LinuxKernelIdeProblem
I am not completely sure that ide-generic really i
On Thursday 09 March 2006 07:35, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> Looking at
> the code I cannot see how the native drivers can depend in any way on
> the ide-generic being loaded before them.
This has never been the claim. The issue is that the real driver needs to
be loaded but that devices will not becom
On Thursday 09 March 2006 18:15, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
> Jurij Smakov wrote:
> While I have not thoroughly tested 2.6.15 in this respect, in 2.6.8 and
> 2.6.12 some IDE drivers, on some hardware, absolutely does[0]. Maybe
> this is fixed in 2.6.15/16.
I've forwarded this message to [EMAIL PROT
On Friday 10 March 2006 15:29, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> If modular-ide is the sole source of trouble here, then what worked in
> 2.6.14-4 and earlier?
<=2.6.12 used initrd-tools and that must still contain the correct magic
to deal with this.
2.6.14 was the first kernel tested with yaird and ini
On Wednesday 15 March 2006 00:15, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> The update is built and tested, it'll appear soon. It contains three
> ABI changing security fixes, so the ABI will be bumped. I can't speak
> for d-i.
ABI changes are for both 2.6 and 2.4 kernel, correct? Or is the ABI change
only for
On Wednesday 15 March 2006 16:38, you wrote:
> waldi added s390 support to initramfs-tools as of version 0.54.
> 0.55 is in incoming.debian.org and should be available in unstable
> soon. klibc-1.2.4-1 has an important s390 fix.
>
> so testing those releases are highly welcome.
> you can rebuild yo
I don't really understand what's happening here. 2.6.15 images install
perfectly and use initramfs-tools, but 2.6.16 seems to get totally
confused and tries to use yaird instead.
The system is running 2.4.27.
ii initramfs-tools 0.55btools for generating an initramfs
ii udev 0.
On Thursday 16 March 2006 18:41, Frans Pop wrote:
> I don't really understand what's happening here. 2.6.15 images install
> perfectly and use initramfs-tools, but 2.6.16 seems to get totally
> confused and tries to use yaird instead.
After creating the initramfs manually u
Thanks Bastian.
On Thursday 16 March 2006 17:29, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 04:13:21PM +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
> > Only problem was that the network interface did not come up. Trying
> > to manually start it resulted in:
>
> You need a 2.6.16-rc5 kernel a
On Thursday 16 March 2006 19:26, Bastian Blank wrote:
> Yes, this is the definition until now. If you don't want to wait for
> the next snapshot, you have to force it with /etc/kernel-img.conf.
Shouldn't it at least have seen that initramfs-tools was installed and
used that as yaird was not even
On Friday 17 March 2006 23:34, Manuel Bilderbeek wrote:
> Hey! The problem with the "no init found" is gone! So, the cause was
> in the initrd after all! Altough, it booted a lot further, it still
> didn't complete it: when it wants to mount the root fs, it gives an
> error that it can't find /dev/
severity 358510 important
thanks
On Thursday 23 March 2006 00:57, Glenn English wrote:
> When it comes time, during the boot process, to mount the root
> partition, sda has become a SATA drive. The boot kernel says sda3
> doesn't exist, and drops to a shell (or when the SCSI has only one
> partiti
On Thursday 23 March 2006 21:30, Sven Luther wrote:
> There are some minor technical hurdles to it, and a strong irrational
> opposition to it though, so it is probably going to stay a problem.
You don't learn, do you?
pgppU8gwjUm0D.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Friday 24 March 2006 15:29, Max Vozeler wrote:
> My question is: How can I
> determine the subset of flavours that are used in -di packages
> and that it makes sense to build module udebs for?
All flavors d-i builds udebs from for all architectures can be found in
the d-i SVN archive in packag
On Monday 27 March 2006 00:42, Shyamal Prasad wrote:
> (X-Debbugs-CC to debian-kernel at Sven Luther's request, perhaps this
> should have been filed against initramfs-tools directly)
This is not an initramfs-tools problem, but the result of powerpc daily
d-i builds, for which Sven himself is
2006 03:52:30 +0200 (CEST)
X-ME-UUID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from sven by pegasos with local (Exim 4.50)
id 1FNgsa-Xp-6p
for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 27 Mar 2006 03:50:48 +0200
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 03:50:43 +0200
To: Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: d-i daily
On Monday 27 March 2006 17:21, Sven Luther wrote:
> with something like 18 hours of interval between them, which i believe
If anybody can tell me where these 18 hours come from, I'll be happy to
consider apologizing.
I replied two times on the same subject as there was both a thread on
d-boot a
On Monday 27 March 2006 16:58, Thomas Jahns wrote:
> Please comment. But with non-working PS/2 keyboard and non-working
> /etc/fstab for both kernel version, the 2.6.16 image is pretty
> worthless to me at this moment.
You could try using the rescue mode [1] of the Etch Beta 2 release [2] of
Debi
Package: linux-2.6
Version: 2.6.16-4
Severity: important
Tags: upstream
Up to the latest 2.6.15 kernel I've always had good temperature control
for my laptop with the fan starting up and slowing down as needed.
Now the fan will not start up anymore until the processor is already
overheated. The
On Thursday 13 April 2006 22:59, Steve Langasek wrote:
> I think etch should support 2.4 in the sense of "upgrade support only";
> i.e., it should support 2.4 because we need to be able to install etch
> on systems running sarge 2.4 kernels, not because we'll provide support
> for 2.4 in etch.
Wha
Package: initramfs-tools
Version: 0.59b
I've reported this before, but now I've traced it...
During kernel upgrade on S/390 I see this error:
ln: creating symbolic link `/tmp/mkinitramfs_laxXYw//etc/modprobe.d/dasd'
to `/tmp/initramfs_dasd': File exists
The attached trace (which cost me quite
Package: linux-2.6
Version: 2.6.16-1
Tags: patch
Please consider applying the patch from:
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=7896&action=view
that belongs to bug:
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6395
This patch has already been signed off by the upstream ACPI maintainer
severity 363997 important
merge 363997 360336
severity 363997 critical
thanks
On Thursday 20 April 2006 23:24, Frans Pop wrote:
> Please consider applying the patch from:
>http://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=7896&action=view
> that belongs to bug:
>http://bug
severity 363997 important
tags 363997 - patch
thanks
On Friday 21 April 2006 03:35, Frans Pop wrote:
> > This patch has already been signed off by the upstream ACPI
> > maintainer.
Looks like upstream may prefer a different patch that reverses a quirk
that was introduced to ma
Package: initramfs-tools
Version: 0.60
Something I find extremely annoying at the moment is that initramfs-tools
is silent when it generates an initrd during upgrade of, for example,
udev.
What I get on e.g. my sparc is:
Setting up udev (0.090-1) ...
Installing new version of config file
tag 363997 upstream
merge 363997 360336
thanks
Latest from upstream is that the patch I linked to in [1] will be included
in 2.6.10, so I suggest just waiting for that.
[1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=363997;msg=5
pgpInu0p5G758.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Saturday 23 July 2005 20:47, Andrew Moise wrote:
> After installing linux-image, the automatic run of lilo failed. I
> found that that had been because my /vmlinuz symlink pointed to
> '/boot/-2.6' and my /initrd.img to '/boot/-2.6'.
That should probably be '/boot-2.6' in both cases. At leas
Package: linux-source-2.6.12
Version: 2.6.12-1
Yesterday I experienced a fairly long pause during boot of my Toshiba
Satellite A40 laptop. The pause happens while IDE interfaces are being
probed as indicated in the fragment from kern.log below.
The pause was long enough (about 10-15 seconds) that
Package: linux-source-2.6.12
Version: 2.6.12-1
Severity: minor
linux-image-2.6.12-1-686 includes both the genrtc and rtc modules.
During boot, the genrtc driver is loaded fairly early on. Later, hotplug
tries to also load the rtc module which fails.
I'm not sure which driver is to be preferred, b
On Tuesday 26 July 2005 02:06, Steve Langasek wrote:
> I believe Joey Hess is the person who has the best handle on what the
> actual minimum requirements are for installing sarge. Joey, do you
> have anything we could add to the sarge release notes for this, if it's
> not already in there?
The d
1 - 100 of 461 matches
Mail list logo
