On Thu, 2010-01-14 at 13:06 +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Jan 14, Fathi Boudra wrote:
>
> > it was my use case, unfortunately udev package upgrade failed and
> > apt-get dist-upgrade stopped.
>
> This is the cause, the new linux-image-2.6.32-trunk-* packages do not
> match the regexp.
> Kernel
On Jan 14, Fathi Boudra wrote:
> it was my use case, unfortunately udev package upgrade failed and
> apt-get dist-upgrade stopped.
This is the cause, the new linux-image-2.6.32-trunk-* packages do not
match the regexp.
Kernel people, should I change it?
ver=$(echo $pkg | sed -nr
"s/^.*linux-im
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> Yes, this will require a lockstep upgrade like it happened for lenny.
> If you upgrade both the kernel and udev at the same time the udev
> package will detect it and bypass the version check.
it was my use case, unfortunately udev package u
On Jan 14, Fathi Boudra wrote:
> I would like to come back to the distribution upgrade issue since udev
> package cannot be installed if the kernel doesn't support
> CONFIG_SYSFS_DEPRECATED (like Lenny kernel 2.6.26).
Yes, this will require a lockstep upgrade like it happened for lenny.
If you up
Hi,
I would like to come back to the distribution upgrade issue since udev
package cannot be installed if the kernel doesn't support
CONFIG_SYSFS_DEPRECATED (like Lenny kernel 2.6.26).
Recently, I have updated a machine from Lenny to Squeeze and apt-get
dist-upgrade failed as expected.
The kernel
Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Nov 10, Marco d'Itri wrote:
>
>> Due to changes in udev 147, squeeze will not support kernels earlier
>> than 2.6.27.
> I uploaded a 147-2 package which reverts the O_CLOEXEC change and allows
> 2.6.26, let's see if it works.
Big thanks for working on this issue. I hope i
Cyril Brulebois writes:
> Goswin von Brederlow (11/11/2009):
>> Homework: Find out how
>>
>> I uploaded a 147-2 package which reverts the O_CLOEXEC change and
>> allows 2.6.26, let's see if it works.
>>
>> translates to
>>
>> I stop using inotify_init1().
>
> Easy:
> | --- a/udev/ude
Goswin von Brederlow (11/11/2009):
> Homework: Find out how
>
> I uploaded a 147-2 package which reverts the O_CLOEXEC change and
> allows 2.6.26, let's see if it works.
>
> translates to
>
> I stop using inotify_init1().
Easy:
| --- a/udev/udev-watch.c
| +++ b/udev/udev-watch.c
| @@
Julien Cristau writes:
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 16:45:58 +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>
>> According to "man 2 open":
>>
>>O_CLOEXEC (Since Linux 2.6.23)
>>
>> So why does using this flag require 2.6.27? Who is wrong here?
>>
> If you'd actually bothered to look at the changes i
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 04:51:49PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Nov 11, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>
> >O_CLOEXEC (Since Linux 2.6.23)
> > So why does using this flag require 2.6.27? Who is wrong here?
> I understand that it is needed for inotify_init1(2).
That makes more send. The s
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 16:45:58 +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> According to "man 2 open":
>
>O_CLOEXEC (Since Linux 2.6.23)
>
> So why does using this flag require 2.6.27? Who is wrong here?
>
If you'd actually bothered to look at the changes in question, you would
have noticed t
On Nov 11, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>O_CLOEXEC (Since Linux 2.6.23)
>
> So why does using this flag require 2.6.27? Who is wrong here?
I understand that it is needed for inotify_init1(2).
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) writes:
> On Nov 10, Marco d'Itri wrote:
>
>> Due to changes in udev 147, squeeze will not support kernels earlier
>> than 2.6.27.
> I uploaded a 147-2 package which reverts the O_CLOEXEC change and allows
> 2.6.26, let's see if it works.
>
> --
> ciao,
> Marco
Acco
On Nov 10, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> Due to changes in udev 147, squeeze will not support kernels earlier
> than 2.6.27.
I uploaded a 147-2 package which reverts the O_CLOEXEC change and allows
2.6.26, let's see if it works.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Zitat von Julien Cristau :
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 02:14:00 -0600, Adam Majer wrote:
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 07:56:16AM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 06:08:08PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > Due to changes in udev 147, squeeze will not support kernels earlier
> > than
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 02:14:00 -0600, Adam Majer wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 07:56:16AM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 06:08:08PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > > Due to changes in udev 147, squeeze will not support kernels earlier
> > > than 2.6.27.
> >
> > What a
retitle 549710 release-notes: [SQUEEZE] udev drops support for kernels < 2.6.22
(or <2.6.27)
thanks
The requirement might be raised to 2.6.27
(which is higher that the one in Lenny).
See udev maintainer announcement and thread[1]:
On Tue, 2009-11-10 at 18:08 +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote in:
> Due
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 07:56:16AM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 06:08:08PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > Due to changes in udev 147, squeeze will not support kernels earlier
> > than 2.6.27.
>
> What are these changes?
Seems it is related to signalfd4 syscall.
- Adam
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 06:08:08PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> Due to changes in udev 147, squeeze will not support kernels earlier
> than 2.6.27.
What are these changes?
> If your packages have code needed to support old kernels, this is the
> right time to clean it up.
No.
> This means that
On Nov 10, Philipp Kern wrote:
> > Yes, it would not work because they also tend to be incompatible with
> > older configurations and so packages would need to provide two sets of
> > configuration files (for a start).
> Uh, so the reboot to get a newer kernel before the upgrade could possibly fa
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 06:08:08PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> Due to changes in udev 147, squeeze will not support kernels earlier
> than 2.6.27.
> If your packages have code needed to support old kernels, this is the
> right time to clean it up.
No, it isn't. Packages need to support the 2.6.
On 2009-11-10, Marco d'Itri wrote:
>> Since it's seeming more and more common for udev to be tied to specific
>> kernel versions, have you considered allowing major versions of udev
>> to be installed in parallel?
> Yes, it would not work because they also tend to be incompatible with
> older conf
On Nov 10, Andres Salomon wrote:
> Since it's seeming more and more common for udev to be tied to specific
> kernel versions, have you considered allowing major versions of udev
> to be installed in parallel?
Yes, it would not work because they also tend to be incompatible with
older configuratio
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 12:27:16 -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 18:08:08 +0100
> m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) wrote:
>
> > Due to changes in udev 147, squeeze will not support kernels earlier
> > than 2.6.27.
> >
> > If your packages have code needed to support old kernels, t
On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 18:08:08 +0100
m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) wrote:
> Due to changes in udev 147, squeeze will not support kernels earlier
> than 2.6.27.
>
> If your packages have code needed to support old kernels, this is the
> right time to clean it up.
>
> This means that lenny->squeeze u
Due to changes in udev 147, squeeze will not support kernels earlier
than 2.6.27.
If your packages have code needed to support old kernels, this is the
right time to clean it up.
This means that lenny->squeeze upgrades will use the same lockstep
kernel/udev upgrade method used for etch->lenny upg
26 matches
Mail list logo
