On Wed, 10 Sep 2008, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 12:37:22AM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
Daniel's helpful bug (#497270) points out that we have embedded copies
of isolinux in the debian-cd package. It's prompted me to look for
other embedded data, and I've found
On Tue, 26 Oct 2010, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
r...@aranym:/var/cache/pbuilder/result # fgrep rtc /proc/devices
254 rtc
Maybe try
# modprobe rtc-cmos
(and check dmesg.)
If that doesn't help, try
# mknod /dev/rtc c 254 0
# hwclock
Do you get an error?
(You probably need advice from someone
.
Sincerely,
Finn Thain
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
On Sun, 12 Feb 2012, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
The idea of this exercise is to detect an emulator _without_ special
setup?
I found a post [1] by Dave O'Neill which has some ideas, like checking
/proc/ide/hd*/model (though grep -q X /sys/class/block/*/device/model
would probably work better,
On Sun, 12 Feb 2012, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
The idea of this exercise is to detect an emulator _without_ special
setup?
You could test for slight differences in CPU or FPU behaviour. It needn't
be a privileged operation (kernel hacks may not be needed).
I don't know what those differences
On Tue, 14 Feb 2012, Petr Stehlik wrote:
if the clock speed is higher than 30 MHz bus clock then it most
probably can't be a real HW. This check would naturally fail on slow
hosts...
... and busy hosts.
And, in general, that reasoning could also fail if imvirt was running on
ColdFire
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
Hi,
I can try to update the package and build it with gcc-4.4 (which is our
current standard although people would love to switch to gcc-4.6), if
that works.
I was able to built it (without docs, I didn't have the tools) from the
gitorious
On Wed, 14 Dec 2011, Andreas Schwab wrote:
This now dereferences too much.
Oops. Thanks for spotting that. I'll leave it to Laurent to fix.
Finn
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
On Thu, 15 Dec 2011, Laurent Vivier wrote:
Where can I find a [...] cross-compiler ?
Thorsten has provided some debs here http://wiki.debian.org/M68k/Gcc
Finn
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
Source: linux
Version: 4.4
In Linux v3.19, CONFIG_MAC_SCSI became a tristate option (instead of
bool). In Linux v4.4, CONFIG_MAC8390 became a tristate option (it too was
previously bool).
Please set CONFIG_MAC_SCSI=m and CONFIG_MAC8390=m for m68k kernel builds
to reduce the size of the kernel
I checked the kernel builds in snapshot.debian.org, and all of the Linux
builds that were archived since this bug report was opened 8 months ago
still exhibit the same problem.
If the BTS is the wrong way to have this issue addressed, would someone
please refer me to some instructions for
On Mon, 26 Jun 2017, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> >> I think you ran into this issue:
> >>
> >> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8098441/
>
> I use NatFeat disc only, though, not the ncr controller.
There is no working ncr controller provided by aranym, just a stub for
one, sufficient to fool
On Mon, 26 Jun 2017, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> On 06/26/2017 12:29 AM, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> > I cannot boot Linux 4.9, but 4.1 still works. (I think 4.3 also
> > failed, but I had autoremoved that already.)
>
> I think you ran into this issue:
>
> >
On Sun, 11 Feb 2018, Jean-Michel Vourg?re wrote:
> Hi
>
> Last build of rrdtool failed on m68k, because gcc IEEE stack pre-check fails
> [1].
>
> The autoconf runs this:
>
> #include
> int main(void){
>double rrdnan,rrdinf,rrdc,rrdzero;
>;
>/* some math to see if we get a
On Thu, 12 Jul 2018, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> On 07/11/2018 01:11 PM, Simon McVittie wrote:
> >
> > Thanks. Does the result work (at least minimally, e.g. the js52
> > interpreter can print("hello, world")) on real m68k hardware?
>
> I just did a testbuild with the testsuite enabled
On Thu, 11 Jul 2019, user...@yahoo.com wrote:
> 8) Xorg_sid_fbdev.log: Xorg log file for test (3)
> 9) Xorg_sid_mach64.log : Xorg log file for test (4)
Thanks for sending these results.
Unfortunately these SID test results might be skewed because the X server
is continually logging
On Thu, 11 Jul 2019, user...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> No, for all the tests today, I used 4.19.56-debian-pmac, with the same
> kernel command line (except for root=).
>
Right. My mistake.
> > > d) It takes approximately three seconds to open an xfce4-terminal in
> > > Debian 8.11, six seconds in
On Thu, 11 Jul 2019, user...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On 7/11/19 8:15 PM, Finn Thain wrote:
> > On Thu, 11 Jul 2019, user...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > ...
> >>
> >> Shadowfb has no effect for mach64.
> >
> > I haven't seen any results that confirm this. Your
On Fri, 12 Jul 2019, Michel D?nzer wrote:
> On 2019-07-11 6:49 p.m., user...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >
> > b) I was not able to install Michel's patch -- I wasn't sure what
> > compile or other options to use. It looks like I could build a new
> > kernel with that (patched) module; would that be
On Fri, 12 Jul 2019, user...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > Please see attached "all.tar.xz", which contains the following files:
> >
> > "x11perf -all" tests:
> >
> > 1) x11perf_8_fbdev.txt: Debian 8.11, mach64 removed
> > 2) x11perf_8_mach64.txt : Debian 8.11, mach64 installed
> > 3)
On Mon, 15 Jul 2019, Michel D?nzer wrote:
> On 2019-07-13 2:25 a.m., Finn Thain wrote:
> >
> > Michel, since this is fbdev not mach64, the bug you found cannot have
> > caused this. Is this problem confined to powerpc or does it also
> > appear in other Xorg regressi
On Wed, 16 Sep 2020, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Finn Thain dixit:
>
> >I think it would be helpful to everyone if nocheck could be avoided
> >where possible. I wonder where is that possible.
>
> I'd prefer if it could be added only for problematic packages, or d
On Tue, 15 Sep 2020, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> >
> >> On m68k and sh4, the buildds are currently configured to pass
> >> "nocheck"
> >
> > Precisely for this reason, some packages in the archive ignore that on
> > these architectures.
> >
> > Without the testsuite we cannot reliably
On Thu, 17 Sep 2020, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
>
> Well, to be honest, you should never use the Debian QEMU package.
> It's almost always very outdated and would lack important patches
> like these. It's easier to use local builds from git.
>
> Erm, excuse me?!?!?!
>
It's an
24 matches
Mail list logo
