Re: 2.4.5 keyspan driver

In the hopes that it might prove helpful, I reran coldsync after loading usbserial.o and keyspan.o with the "debug=1" option. Here's what was logged: - - Jul 3 19:10:45 glitch kernel: usbserial.c: USB Serial support registered for Generic Jul 3 19:10:45 glitch kernel: usb.c: registere

Re: usbserial/keyspan module load race [was: 2.4.5 keyspan driver]

adric@glitch[~]$ dpkg -l modutils | tail -n1 ii modutils 2.4.6-3Linux module utilities. On Mon, Jul 02, 2001 at 03:43:25PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > What version of the modutils package do you have? > > thanks, > > greg k-h - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscri

Re: usbserial/keyspan module load race [was: 2.4.5 keyspan driver]

It wasn't quite as cooperative today, but after a few attempts I was able to reproduce it. root@glitch[~]# modprobe keyspan Warning: /lib/modules/2.4.5/kernel/drivers/usb/serial/usbserial.o symbol for parameter vendor not found Segmentation fault root@glitch[~]# ps -ef|grep

Re: [patch] rio500 devfs support

It's working beautifully here. I'll forward the patch to the maintainer, since I have no idea if he's seen this thread. Cheers! PGP signature

Re: [patch] rio500 devfs support

I was thinking of doing some similar updates this evening after work. Darn it... now I have to find something else to do! :-) Going by this morning's comments from Richard Gooch, it sounds like the if (rio->devfs == NULL) dbg("probe_rio: device node registration failed"

Re: [patch] rio500 devfs support

Ok, back to the original version then. Thanx! On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 12:16:51AM -0600, Richard Gooch wrote: > No, it's a bad idea to test the error from devfs_register() unless you > *really* have a good reason. Most people who think they have a good > reason actually don't, they're just confus

Re: [patch] rio500 devfs support

ue, Jun 19, 2001 at 05:52:24PM -0500, Gregory T. Norris wrote: > The attached diff adds devfs support to the rio500 driver, so that > /dev/usb/rio500 gets created automagically. It was generated against > 2.4.5, but probably applies fine against any recent kernel. Comments > are welcome (

[patch] rio500 devfs support

The attached diff adds devfs support to the rio500 driver, so that /dev/usb/rio500 gets created automagically. It was generated against 2.4.5, but probably applies fine against any recent kernel. Comments are welcome (but be gentle, this is my first attempt at a kernel patch :-). Cheers! diff

Re: Agpgart for AMD761

It seems to be working just fine here (kernel 2.4.5), provided that the "agp_try_unsupported=1" option is specified. This tells the driver to assume that it behaves like known chipsets from the same vendor. On Tue, Jun 05, 2001 at 03:00:53PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I was wondering wha

Re: [PATCH] 2.4.4 breaks VMware

On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 06:53:49AM +0200, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote: > An even better solution would be getting vmware 2.0.4 which seems to > be a bit more 2.4-kernel compliant. > It is not yet announced on their web from what I can see but you may > already fetch it from p.ex. ftp://download1.vmware.c

2.4.1/2.4.2-pre3 lockup unmounting usbdevfs

I'm getting an intermittent (but fairly reproducible) lockup under 2.4.1 and 2.4.2-pre3, which seems to be occurring when usbdevfs is unmounted. The system appears to freeze almost completely; I can still switch VCs (assuming I wasn't in X at the time) but little else. Sometimes (but not always)

Re: vmware 2.0.3, kernel 2.4.0 and a cdrom

On Mon, Jan 15 2001, Jens Axboe wrote: > Could you try with this patch, so maybe we can get some hints as to > what is going on? Here's what I got after applying your patch to 2.4.1: - SNIP - Feb 5 17:25:26 glitch kernel: VFS: Disk change detected on device sr(11,0) F

2.4.0 CDROM problem, ILLEGAL REQUEST

When playing audio CDs under kernel 2.4.0, syslog is showing the following message repeatedly: sr0: CDROM (ioctl) reports ILLEGAL REQUEST. The command line utility cdplay seems to only cause this occasionally, when I start playing a CD or skip to a different track, while gnome's gtcd will g

Re: PROBLEM: umount report "busy" on r/o remount of root filesystem

I seem to be able to reliably reproduce it as well. Let me know if I can be of any help. On Mon, Sep 18, 2000 at 03:38:28PM +0200, Udo A. Steinberg wrote: > This should probably be added to the 2.4.x bug-list. Since Pavel > seems to be able to constantly reproduce it, it should be possible to >

Re: [BUG] That bloody /usr/local busy back again

I finally had a chance to try it out under 2.2.17... no hint of a problem there. So presumably it is a 2.4.0-testX kernel issue. I don't know what apt-move does which triggers it, but it seems to do it quite reliably. On Sun, Sep 17, 2000 at 12:13:14PM -0500, Gregory T. Norris wrote: >

Re: [BUG] That bloody /usr/local busy back again

Do you have an apt-move mirror on that filesystem, by any chance? I see the same thing on an ext2 partition, which I've been able to verify is *definately* related to apt-move. I haven't yet filed a bug report, because I need to try it out under 2.2.17 first. On Sun, Sep 17, 2000 at 01:17:11PM

Re: 2.4.0-test8 and ssh (OpenSSH_2.1.1): error: socket: Address family not supported by protocol

It looks like this one's a ssh issue. If you haven't already gotten it resolved, take a look at ... there's a patch which should take care of it. PGP signature

Re: 2.4.0-test8 and ssh (OpenSSH_2.1.1): error: socket: Address family not supported by protocol

I'm seeing this as well. Have you tried it without X11 forwarding? It seems to work correctly in that case. On Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 04:42:55PM +0200, Christophe Broult wrote: > > Hello, > > I have just compiled the last version of the Linux kernel > (2.4.0-test8) and somehow I am no longer ab

Re: 2.4.0-test7 lockup - fixed

On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 08:24:00PM -0500, Gregory T. Norris wrote: > I'm seeing a hard lockup under 2.4.0-test7. The good news is that it's > 100% reproducible... all I have to do is attempt to install > gpm_1.19.3-3.deb from Debian unstable (interestingly, no other package

2.4.0-test7 lockup

I'm seeing a hard lockup under 2.4.0-test7. The good news is that it's 100% reproducible... all I have to do is attempt to install gpm_1.19.3-3.deb from Debian unstable (interestingly, no other package seems to trigger the problem). The bad news is that I have no idea what the problem is. The k