Pavel Machek wrote:
On Thu 2006-11-30 00:51:06, Gilles Grandou wrote:
lspci -v
[...]
01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: ATI Technologies Inc RV350 [Mobility
Radeon 9600 M10] (prog-if 00 [VGA])
using radeon xorg server.
And no binary modules, right?
right ;)
Gilles.
Op Thu, 30 Nov 2006 13:53:46 +0100
schreef Stefan Seyfried [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
BTW, what is the first kernel with the correct code? It's not in
2.16.18, is it? Ah, I see they just released 2.6.19, is it in there?
I think it is (i pushed it through Andrew), but i have not checked it.
grep
On Thursday, 30 November 2006 13:53, Stefan Seyfried wrote:
On Thu, Nov 30, 2006 at 10:53:56AM +0100, Tim Dijkstra wrote:
So by checking errno we can distinguish 'to old
kernel' from 'real error'?
Yes, i think so. I have not checked all the possible cases where the
error return value
Hi,
On Thursday, 30 November 2006 01:21, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Thursday, 30 November 2006 00:55, Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi!
I do not like the counting idea; it should be simpler to just check if
all the processes are still stopped.
I thought about that but didn't
On Thursday, 30 November 2006 16:43, Alan Stern wrote:
On Thu, 30 Nov 2006, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
In fact, I really mean that if we want a process to go to the refrigerator,
we
have to set PF_FREEZE for it (otherwise try_to_freeze() won't do anytning).
Thus because we want stopped
On Thu, Nov 30, 2006 at 06:09:33PM +0100, Roberto Oppedisano wrote:
Hi there!
As you can see to make s2ram work I only need to use -sf arg.
Ok.
Kind regards
Roberto
poppero1:~# s2ram -i
This machine can be identified by:
sys_vendor = Hewlett-Packard
sys_product = Compaq
On Thursday, 30 November 2006 17:04, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Thursday, 30 November 2006 16:43, Alan Stern wrote:
On Thu, 30 Nov 2006, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
In fact, I really mean that if we want a process to go to the
refrigerator, we
have to set PF_FREEZE for it (otherwise
On Tue, 2006-11-28 at 17:37 +0100, Stefan Seyfried wrote:
So it is a good idea to tell the engineer to do mkswap on the swap
partition before putting the disk into the replacement hardware.
Ugh, no it's not. You really want the UUID on the swap area to remain
the same.
--
Peter
On Thu, Nov 30, 2006 at 03:00:43PM -0500, Peter Jones wrote:
On Tue, 2006-11-28 at 17:37 +0100, Stefan Seyfried wrote:
So it is a good idea to tell the engineer to do mkswap on the swap
partition before putting the disk into the replacement hardware.
Ugh, no it's not. You really want
On Thu, 2006-11-30 at 15:00 -0500, Peter Jones wrote:
Ugh, no it's not. You really want the UUID on the swap area to remain
the same.
Why?
[not questioning your reasoning, this is coming from someone who knows
very little about swap structure and what the UUID is used for]
Daniel
On Thu, Nov 30, 2006 at 03:00:43PM -0500, I wrote:
On Tue, 2006-11-28 at 17:37 +0100, Stefan Seyfried wrote:
So it is a good idea to tell the engineer to do mkswap on the swap
partition before putting the disk into the replacement hardware.
Ugh, no it's not. You really want the UUID on
On Thursday, 30 November 2006 23:34, Alan Stern wrote:
On Thu, 30 Nov 2006, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On the other hand, a stopped process might be waiting for a signal that
can be sent by an unfreezable process -- and the stopped process might
be
holding a lock which is
On Thu, Nov 30, 2006 at 05:17:47PM -0500, Peter Jones wrote:
On Thu, Nov 30, 2006 at 03:00:43PM -0500, I wrote:
On Tue, 2006-11-28 at 17:37 +0100, Stefan Seyfried wrote:
So it is a good idea to tell the engineer to do mkswap on the swap
partition before putting the disk into the
13 matches
Mail list logo
