Hi, Jurij Smakov wrote: > severity 589891 important > thanks > > I don't think that 'grave' is really appropriate here. The latest > version of SILO has been out for quite some time, and this is a first > report of that kind, which makes me think that this is not a common > scenario.
No problem. > The only major change in SILO since the stable version is the switch > from gcc-2.95 to the default gcc (4.3). The rest of the changes should > be pretty benign, mostly related to the changes in libc headers which > were breaking the ability to build SILO from source. Ok. > Next week I'll try to prepare a few versions for you to test, the > one built with the old compiler, and with various suspicious patches > backed out. Ok. Wouldn't have the possibility to test them before Monday evening anyway. > In the meantime, please test whether you can reproduce the problem > with 1.4.14+git20100207-1 - this will narrow the field somewhat. Will do as soon as I'm back home where the box resides. > > debsums: changed file /boot/second.b (from silo package) Hmmm, I didn't notice this before. Could that be related? Will at least once reinstall the current version of silo before trying to use any older version. This looks suspiciously like some PEBKAC by me. (I once forgot to mount /boot in the chroot while testing grub2 on Sparc. I thought, I copied everything back to the real partition, but this looks as if I didn't catch all of it.) Regards, Axel -- ,''`. | Axel Beckert <a...@debian.org>, http://people.debian.org/~abe/ : :' : | Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin `. `' | 1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486 202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE `- | 4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329 6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org