Jeff Dike wrote:
> OK, since it only appears to affect an old kernel and seems to have
> been fixed since then, I would be tempted to just ignore it for now.
As the problem seems to have never turned up again with 2.6.23.12, this
actually seems reasonable.
Maybe the report will still be useful for
On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 11:39:24AM +0100, Massimo Rimondini wrote:
> The above results seem to suggest that the problem only affects 2.6.21
> hosts, provided that the "never failed" above is not due to a sequence
> of lucky coincidences. I have also tried with more than 2 UML instances,
> though, a
Hi Jeff,
> How consistent is this?
Hard to say. As I have mentioned, it happens on a random basis. But I am
observing it roughly once every 5-6 successful attempts.
> I just tried a bunch of times with the recipe you gave, and saw no problems.
In the meantime, I have performed some other expe
On Sun, Dec 30, 2007 at 08:55:57PM +0100, Massimo Rimondini wrote:
> I would like to report this issue, which I have been experiencing since
> I started using SKAS0 mode.
>
> If I run two (or more) UML instances simultaneously, I get random errors
> and segmentation fault reports from guest proces
Hi,
I would like to report this issue, which I have been experiencing since
I started using SKAS0 mode.
If I run two (or more) UML instances simultaneously, I get random errors
and segmentation fault reports from guest processes during the boot
phase. By "simultaneously" I mean that the UML insta
