On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 09:22:57PM +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 18. Januar 2017, 20:05:06 CET schrieb Marc Haber:
> > Is it worth keeping this open? Does the issue still show? Should the
> > bug be retitled to reflect that we're facing a kernel issue? Should
> > there be
Am Mittwoch, 18. Januar 2017, 20:05:06 CET schrieb Marc Haber:
> Is it worth keeping this open? Does the issue still show? Should the
> bug be retitled to reflect that we're facing a kernel issue? Should
> there be language in debian/NEWS to explain this?
>
> Do you have an opinion?
Well I
Is it worth keeping this open? Does the issue still show? Should the
bug be retitled to reflect that we're facing a kernel issue? Should
there be language in debian/NEWS to explain this?
Do you have an opinion?
Greetings
MArc
Am Montag, 19. Dezember 2016, 12:55:12 CET schrieb Martin Steigerwald:
> Am Montag, 19. Dezember 2016, 12:47:56 CET schrieb Marc Haber:
> > On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 12:02:33PM +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> > > Finally I am about to write a mail to LKML and kernel developers about
> > > both
>
On 12/19/2016 12:55 PM, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Am Montag, 19. Dezember 2016, 12:47:56 CET schrieb Marc Haber:
On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 12:02:33PM +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Finally I am about to write a mail to LKML and kernel developers about
both
bugs.
We also need a Debian bug
Am Montag, 19. Dezember 2016, 12:47:56 CET schrieb Marc Haber:
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 12:02:33PM +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> > Finally I am about to write a mail to LKML and kernel developers about
> > both
> > bugs.
>
> We also need a Debian bug report against src:linux to keep the RC
On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 12:55:12PM +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> Do you want to be on Cc for mail to LKML, Marc? Gerlof? My mail to LKML is
> waiting in drafts folder at the moment.
Feel free to add mh+debian-packa...@zugschlus.de at will.
Thanks for helping around here!
Greetings
Marc
On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 12:02:33PM +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> Finally I am about to write a mail to LKML and kernel developers about both
> bugs.
We also need a Debian bug report against src:linux to keep the RC bugs
away from atop.
Greetings
Marc
thanks
> I reported this as:
>
> Bug 190711 - Process accounting: Using the NETLINK inface, the command
> TASKSTATS_CMD_GET returns -EINVAL
> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=190711
>
> In addition with
>
> Bug 190271 - process accounting sometimes does not work
>
Am Samstag, 17. Dezember 2016, 11:05:34 CET schrieb Gerlof Langeveld:
> Hi Martin and Marc,
>
> On 12/14/2016 10:58 AM, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> > I didn´t post to LKML about the bug I reported in kernel upstream
> > bugtracker
> > yet.
> >
> > I ponder whether to report the second issue, the
Hi Martin and Marc,
On 12/14/2016 10:58 AM, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
I didn´t post to LKML about the bug I reported in kernel upstream
bugtracker
yet.
I ponder whether to report the second issue, the one about netlink, that
Gerlof pointed out to the Debian bugtracker, since for Gerlof it
Hi Gerlof,
please no dashes in the upstream version number ;-)
I really appreciate your help in providing atop.
Greetings
Marc
On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 02:56:07PM +0100, Gerlof Langeveld wrote:
> From: Gerlof Langeveld <gerlof.langev...@atoptool.nl>
> Subject: Re: Bug#833997: a
On 12/14/2016 08:18 AM, Marc Haber wrote:
On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 03:50:31PM +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
I see. Marc, IMHO this issue should not hold back uploading new atop to Debian
unstable for inclusion into next Debian version. What do you think?
Agreed. I will document this in
Am Mittwoch, 14. Dezember 2016, 08:18:47 CET schrieb Marc Haber:
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 03:50:31PM +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> > I see. Marc, IMHO this issue should not hold back uploading new atop to
> > Debian unstable for inclusion into next Debian version. What do you
> > think?
>
On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 03:50:31PM +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> I see. Marc, IMHO this issue should not hold back uploading new atop to
> Debian
> unstable for inclusion into next Debian version. What do you think?
Agreed. I will document this in NEWS.Debian and would like to include
Hello Gerlof.
I am cc´ing this once again to the Debian bug report so that the information
gets recorded there. Feel free to drop the Cc again in case you write an
answer which is not related to the bug report.
Am Dienstag, 13. Dezember 2016, 14:50:18 CET schrieb Gerlof Langeveld:
> The reason
Hello Gerlof.
Am Samstag, 12. November 2016, 14:18:02 CET schrieb Gerlof Langeveld:
> Hi Martin,
>
> Thanks for the system call traces!
> I analyzed them in the meantime and have some questions (see end of the
> mail).
Answers below:
> On 11/09/2016 09:37 AM, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> > Hi
Hi Martin,
Thanks for the system call traces!
I analyzed them in the meantime and have some questions (see end of the
mail).
Regards,
Gerlof
On 11/09/2016 09:37 AM, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Hi Gerlof.
Very busy week, so feel free to ask for further information, but please
understand that
Hi Martin,
Hi Marc, hi Gerlof (on CC).
Am Mittwoch, 26. Oktober 2016, 10:44:30 CEST schrieb Marc Haber:
On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 10:31:54AM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
merkaba:~> systemctl status atopacct
● atopacct.service - Atop process accounting daemon
Loaded: loaded
Hi Marc, hi Gerlof (on CC).
Am Mittwoch, 26. Oktober 2016, 10:44:30 CEST schrieb Marc Haber:
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 10:31:54AM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> > merkaba:~> systemctl status atopacct
> > ● atopacct.service - Atop process accounting daemon
> >
> >Loaded: loaded
Hi Martin,
On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 10:31:54AM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> merkaba:~> systemctl status atopacct
> ● atopacct.service - Atop process accounting daemon
>Loaded: loaded (/lib/systemd/system/atopacct.service; enabled; vendor
> preset: enabled)
>Active: active (running)
m: Martin Steigerwald <mar...@lichtvoll.de>
> > Subject: Bug#833997: atop: process accounting does not work
> > To: Marc Haber <mh+debian-packa...@zugschlus.de>
> > Cc: 833...@bugs.debian.org, 833997-submit...@bugs.debian.org
> > Reply-To: Martin Steigerwald <mar..
Subject: Bug#833997: atop: process accounting does not work
> To: Marc Haber <mh+debian-packa...@zugschlus.de>
> Cc: 833...@bugs.debian.org, 833997-submit...@bugs.debian.org
> Reply-To: Martin Steigerwald <mar...@lichtvoll.de>, 833...@bugs.debian.org
> Date: Mon, 19 Sep 201
Hi Marc,
Am Sonntag, 18. September 2016, 16:45:20 CEST schrieb Marc Haber:
> do you still see this issue? Upstream wants to know whether:
>
> - does atopacctd runs as a process at that time?
> - what is its state ('ps -l' output about atopacctd)?
> - what is the output of the command "ls -l
Hi Martin,
do you still see this issue? Upstream wants to know whether:
- does atopacctd runs as a process at that time?
- what is its state ('ps -l' output about atopacctd)?
- what is the output of the command "ls -l /var/run/pacct_*" ?
I currently have the case on a system that just has been
On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 12:48:16PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> Am Samstag, 20. August 2016, 17:18:10 CEST schrieb Marc Haber:
> > On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 11:35:27AM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> > > Process accounting does not seem to work. I wonder why tough.
> > >
> > > atopacct is
Hi Marc,
Am Samstag, 20. August 2016, 17:18:10 CEST schrieb Marc Haber:
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 11:35:27AM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> > Process accounting does not seem to work. I wonder why tough.
> >
> > atopacct is running, and it also seemed to setup process accounting:
> >
> >
Hi Martin,
On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 11:35:27AM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> Process accounting does not seem to work. I wonder why tough.
>
> atopacct is running, and it also seemed to setup process accounting:
>
> merkaba:/run> ls -l pacct_*
> -rw--- 1 root root 0 Aug 11 10:53
tags #833997 confirmed upstream
thanks
On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 11:35:27AM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> Thank you for packaging atop 2.2.3.
>
> Process accounting does not seem to work.
I can confirm all your findings. I'm going to ask upstream to take a
look at this when they have reacted
Package: atop
Version: 2.2.3-1~exp1
Severity: normal
Dear Marc,
Thank you for packaging atop 2.2.3.
Process accounting does not seem to work. I wonder why tough.
atopacct is running, and it also seemed to setup process accounting:
merkaba:/run> ls -l pacct_*
-rw--- 1 root root 0 Aug 11
30 matches
Mail list logo