David,
Compiled and booted!! I apparently will work with voluntary preemption as
well as no premption. No oopses, flags. Next week I will start to play with
it!
Caveat:
Unionfs will not compile against the patched sources (not using it yet so it
can wait).
Get the following harmless
Get the following harmless quip on boot:
Dec 23 18:26:18 d_baron kernel: Testing NMI watchdog ... CPU#0: NMI
appears to be stuck (0-0)!
This means that on your motherboard/CPUs kernel was unable
to setup NMI watchdog. nothing bad, except for kernel won't be
able to detect it's hard
Compiled and booted!! I apparently will work with voluntary preemption as
well as no premption. No oopses, flags. Next week I will start to play with
it!
Caveat:
Unionfs will not compile against the patched sources (not using it yet so it
can wait).
Get the following harmless quip on boot:
Hi
Thanks for your help with this bug.
On Sat, Dec 23, 2006 at 07:01:47PM +0200, David Baron wrote:
Compiled and booted!! I apparently will work with voluntary preemption as
well as no premption. No oopses, flags. Next week I will start to play
with
it!
Caveat:
Unionfs will not
Compiled and booted!! I apparently will work with voluntary preemption as
well as no premption. No oopses, flags. Next week I will start to play with
it!
Caveat:
Unionfs will not compile against the patched sources (not using it yet so it
can wait).
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
David,
Compiled and booted!! I apparently will work with voluntary preemption as
well as no premption. No oopses, flags. Next week I will start to play with
it!
thanks a lot for patience and help!
all the faced bugs will be fixed in next version.
Caveat:
Unionfs will not compile against
On Thursday 21 December 2006 08:16, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
Hi David
When I compiled the kernel yesterday using the same version of the kernel
and the openvz patch I did not need to do anything with symlinking.
My compile line look something like this:
export PATCH_THE_KERNEL=true
untar
David Baron wrote:
On Thursday 21 December 2006 08:16, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
Hi David
When I compiled the kernel yesterday using the same version of the kernel
and the openvz patch I did not need to do anything with symlinking.
My compile line look something like this:
export
Got it to build and even attempt to boot--no undefineds!
The thing listed a lot of oops codes, many involving the journaling, so I
panicked and stopped it.
Additionally, there were items like:
BUG: Using SMP with preemptive
(or something like that.)
(I do not have multiple processors but
David,
Got it to build and even attempt to boot--no undefineds!
thanks a lot for your help!
the previous bugs are fixed: http://bugzilla.openvz.org/show_bug.cgi?id=411
The thing listed a lot of oops codes, many involving the journaling, so I
panicked and stopped it.
Additionally, there
On Tuesday 19 December 2006 22:07, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
Hi
Which kernel version did you apply it against? I have successfully
built it... The version in testing or in unstable?
Latest as of a couple of days ago from unstable, 2.16-8, I believe. The
version of the patch current as of that
Hi
I have built it now and I have no problem building. Not at least
with make-kpkg.
I use this.
According to upstream you did not run make oldconfig for some reason?
It does this anyway. I compied to .config from the non-patched kernel and was
asked to fill in various new items inserted
Hi
I have built it now and I have no problem building. Not at least
with make-kpkg.
I use this.
According to upstream you did not run make oldconfig for some reason?
It does this anyway. I compied to .config from the non-patched kernel and was
asked to fill in various new items inserted
Hi
I have built it now and I have no problem building. Not at least
with make-kpkg.
I use this.
According to upstream you did not run make oldconfig for some reason?
It does this anyway. I compied to .config from the non-patched kernel and
was
asked to fill in various new items inserted
David,
can you attach your resulting .config file please?
Thanks,
Kirill
Hi
I have built it now and I have no problem building. Not at least
with make-kpkg.
I use this.
According to upstream you did not run make oldconfig for some reason?
It does this anyway. I compied to .config from the
This would seem to indicate one (or more) pieces that need be compiled into
the kernel, would it not? (I do compile in all the ovz stuff rather than
leave as modules because I had missing symbols on boot the last time I
tried.)
If someone could point me in the correct direction :-)
David,
David,
ahhh... I guess I know the answer.
you simply set CONFIG_VE_CALLS to 'y', while IPV6 support is in module,
so OpenVZ kernel has reference to symbols in module :/
Pleae check CONFIG_VE_CALLS, CONFIG_VZ_DEV and CONFIG_IPV6 options
These thing are indeed set to 'y', IPV6 to 'm'
Hi David
When I compiled the kernel yesterday using the same version of the kernel
and the openvz patch I did not need to do anything with symlinking.
My compile line look something like this:
export PATCH_THE_KERNEL=true
untar xxx.tar.gz
cd /usr/src/linux
make-kpkg -rfakeroot
Package: kernel-patch-openvz
Version: 028test007.1
Severity: important
Justification: fails to build from source
Here they are: (May be others as well.)
kernel/built-in.o: In function `do_env_create':
vecalls.c:(.text+0x349a7): undefined reference to `ve_snmp_proc_init'
Hi
Which kernel version did you apply it against? I have successfully
built it... The version in testing or in unstable?
Regards,
// Ola
On Tue, Dec 19, 2006 at 10:58:40AM +0200, David Baron wrote:
Package: kernel-patch-openvz
Version: 028test007.1
Severity: important
Justification: fails
Hi
Thanks for the information.
I'll tell the user to compile it in a proper way.
Regards,
// Ola
On Wed, Dec 20, 2006 at 09:27:23AM +0300, Vasily Tarasov wrote:
Hello,
Ola Lundqvist wrote:
Privet
I got the following bug report. Do you know why this problem exist?
Regards,
//
Hi
I have built it now and I have no problem building. Not at least
with make-kpkg.
According to upstream you did not run make oldconfig for some reason?
So my question to you (before I close this bug) is how exactly you
built the kernel?
Did you do as described in the README file or in some
22 matches
Mail list logo
