On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 08:41:58AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> Hello,
>
> It seems as the 2.4.27 and 2.6.8 kernels which are sarge release candidates
> are now frozen, and will be part of sarge as is, complete with all the bugs
> and problems present in them, and maybe even some security issues wh
* Florian wrote:
> Norbert Tretkowski wrote:
> > Hmm... what's the output of 'lspci' on your system?
>
> Here it is:
>
> :00:03.0 Ethernet controller: Digital Equipment Corporation DECchip
> 21142/43 (rev 30)
> :00:07.0 ISA bridge: Contaq Microsystems 82c693
> :00:07.1 IDE interface
On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 12:23:29AM -0400, Jan Harkes wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 12:17:46PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 08:27:53PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > Mmm, probably that 2001 discussion about the keyspan firmware, right ?
> > >
> > > http://lists.debian.org
On Monday 04 April 2005 23:23, Jan Harkes wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 12:17:46PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 08:27:53PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > Mmm, probably that 2001 discussion about the keyspan firmware, right ?
> > >
> > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-leg
Simple program to convert the keyspan firmware header files to IHEX
formatted files that can be loaded with hotplug.
This is really only needed once to convert the existing keyspan firmware
headers, which is what the next patch will do.
Signed-off-by: Jan Harkes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Index: linu
Convert the keyspan USB serial driver to use request_firmware and
firmware_load_ihex.
Signed-off-by: Jan Harkes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Index: linux/drivers/usb/serial/keyspan.c
===
--- linux.orig/drivers/usb/serial/keyspan.c 2005-0
Adding firmware_load_ihex, to load IHEX formatted firmware images.
Signed-off-by: Jan Harkes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
drivers/base/firmware_class.c | 151 ++
include/linux/firmware.h | 26 +++
2 files changed, 177 insertions(+)
Index: linux/inclu
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 12:17:46PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 08:27:53PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Mmm, probably that 2001 discussion about the keyspan firmware, right ?
> >
> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2001/04/msg00145.html
> >
> > Can you summarize the con
Horms wrote:
> Do you know if it has a CAN number assigned, I have been unable to find one?
It's CAN-2005-0749.
Cheers,
Moritz
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Package: kernel-source-2.6.8
Version: 2.6.8-15
Severity: important
Tags: security
Hi,
CAN-2005-0937 describes the following Denial-of-Service vulnerability:
Some futex functions in futex.c for Linux kernel 2.6.x perform get_user
calls while holding the mmap_sem semaphore, which could allow local
Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
(-project added to the Cc:, non-debian related lists removed)
> No documentation for the C compiler (not even a documentation of the
> options) will be neither fun for the users of Debian nor for the Debian
> maintainers - but it's the future of Debian...
Package: kernel-source-2.6.11
Version: 2.6.11-2
During a half hour, my system became completely irresponsive. As far as
I understand the messages in /var/log/kern.log, the kernel ran out of
memory. In that time, I wasn't able to close any program, nor log in on
a textconsole. There continously was
As requested
===
If you don't understand why your files were rejected, or if the
override file requires editing, reply to this email.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 11:24:05PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> It assuredly can't hurt to add a few lines of comments to tg3.c, and since it
> is probably (well, 1/3 chance here) you who added said firmware to the tg3.c
> file, i guess you are even well placed to at least exclude it from being
> GP
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 04:47:36PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Sven Luther wrote:
> >Yep, but in the meantime, let's clearly mark said firmware as
> >not-covered-by-the-GPL. In the acenic case it seems to be even easier, as
> >the
> >firmware is in a separate acenic_firmware.h file, and it just ne
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 10:23:08PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 09:58:30PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 09:29:45PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 12:17:46PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 08:27:53PM +020
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 04:55:27PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 09:29:45PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> >
> > Nope, i am aiming to clarify this issue with regard to the debian kernel, so
> > that we may be clear with ourselves, and actually ship something which is
> > not
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 11:05:03PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 10:23:08PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 09:58:30PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 09:29:45PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 12:17:46PM
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 09:29:45PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
>
> Nope, i am aiming to clarify this issue with regard to the debian kernel, so
> that we may be clear with ourselves, and actually ship something which is not
> of dubious legal standing, and that we could get sued over for GPL violati
Sven Luther wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 03:55:55PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 10:51:30AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
Then let's see some acts. We (lkml) are not the ones with the percieved
problem, or the ones discussing it.
Actually, there are some legi
On Mon, 2005-04-04 at 23:19 +0900, Horms wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 12:41:33PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 12:08:18AM +0900, Horms wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 11:55:27AM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 30 Mar 2005, Horms wrot
> On Apr 04, Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > is waiting for NEW processing, but i also believe that the dubious
> > copyright assignement will not allow the ftp-masters to let it pass
> > into the archive, since it *IS* a GPL violation, and thus i am doing
> > this in order to solve that
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 03:55:55PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> >On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 10:51:30AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> >
> >>Then let's see some acts. We (lkml) are not the ones with the percieved
> >>problem, or the ones discussing it.
> >
> >
> >Actually, there are so
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 09:58:30PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 09:29:45PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 12:17:46PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 08:27:53PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > > Mmm, probably that 2001 discussion abou
Ian> I think what Greg may have meant[0] was that if it bothers
Ian> you, then you should act by contacting the copyright holders
Ian> privately yourself in each case that you come across and
Ian> asking them if you may add a little comment etc, and then
Ian> submit patches once
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 09:29:45PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 12:17:46PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 08:27:53PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > Mmm, probably that 2001 discussion about the keyspan firmware, right ?
> > >
> > > http://lists.debian.or
Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 10:51:30AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
Then let's see some acts. We (lkml) are not the ones with the percieved
problem, or the ones discussing it.
Actually, there are some legitimate problems with some of the files in
the Linux source base. Last time this
+handler!
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: Florian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 04 Apr 2005 21:42:38 +0200
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Lines: 17
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 09:05:18PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Apr 04, Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > What if we don't want to do so? I know I personally posted a solution
> Then probably the extremists in Debian will manage to kill your driver,
> like they did with tg3 and others.
On Apr 04, Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > What if we don't want to do so? I know I personally posted a solution
> > Then probably the extremists in Debian will manage to kill your driver,
> > like they did with tg3 and others.
> Nope, they were simply moved to non-free, as it should
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 09:05:18PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Apr 04, Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > What if we don't want to do so? I know I personally posted a solution
> Then probably the extremists in Debian will manage to kill your driver,
> like they did with tg3 and others.
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 08:27:53PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> Mmm, probably that 2001 discussion about the keyspan firmware, right ?
>
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2001/04/msg00145.html
>
> Can you summarize the conclusion of the thread, or what you did get from it,
> please ?
That
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 09:05:18PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Apr 04, Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > What if we don't want to do so? I know I personally posted a solution
> Then probably the extremists in Debian will manage to kill your driver,
> like they did with tg3 and others.
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 12:17:46PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 08:27:53PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Mmm, probably that 2001 discussion about the keyspan firmware, right ?
> >
> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2001/04/msg00145.html
> >
> > Can you summarize the con
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 08:12:48PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-04-04 at 20:21 +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 10:51:30AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > > Then let's see some acts. We (lkml) are not the ones with the percieved
> > > problem, or the ones discussing it.
Horms wrote:
> Thanks, this fix is in SVN.
>
> Do you know if it has a CAN number assigned, I have been unable to find one?
If you've not guessed already, it's CAN-2005-0749 ;-)
--
see shy jo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Mon, 2005-04-04 at 20:21 +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 10:51:30AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > Then let's see some acts. We (lkml) are not the ones with the percieved
> > problem, or the ones discussing it.
[...]
> All i am asking is that *the copyright holders* of said fir
On Apr 04, Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What if we don't want to do so? I know I personally posted a solution
Then probably the extremists in Debian will manage to kill your driver,
like they did with tg3 and others.
This sucks, yes.
--
ciao,
Marco (@debian.org)
signature.asc
Descript
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 10:51:30AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> Then let's see some acts. We (lkml) are not the ones with the percieved
> problem, or the ones discussing it.
Actually, there are some legitimate problems with some of the files in
the Linux source base. Last time this came up, the Aceni
Accepted:
kernel-headers-2.4-s390_2.4.27-1_s390.deb
to
pool/main/k/kernel-latest-2.4-s390/kernel-headers-2.4-s390_2.4.27-1_s390.deb
kernel-image-2.4-s390_2.4.27-1_s390.deb
to pool/main/k/kernel-latest-2.4-s390/kernel-image-2.4-s390_2.4.27-1_s390.deb
kernel-image-2.4-s390x_2.4.27-1_s390.deb
Accepted:
kernel-headers-2.6-s390_2.6.8-1_s390.deb
to pool/main/k/kernel-latest-2.6-s390/kernel-headers-2.6-s390_2.6.8-1_s390.deb
kernel-headers-2.6-s390x_2.6.8-1_s390.deb
to
pool/main/k/kernel-latest-2.6-s390/kernel-headers-2.6-s390x_2.6.8-1_s390.deb
kernel-image-2.6-s390_2.6.8-1_s390.deb
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 10:51:30AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 04:16:47PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > This is just the followup on said discussion, involving the larger LKML
> > audience, in order to get this fixed for good. As said, it is just a mere
> > technicality to get o
(new) kernel-headers-2.4-s390_2.4.27-1_s390.deb optional devel
Header files related to latest Linux kernel version 2.4 on IBM S/390
This package will always depend on the latest 2.4 kernel headers available
for IBM S/390.
(new) kernel-image-2.4-s390_2.4.27-1_s390.deb optional base
Linux kernel im
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 10:51:30AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 04:16:47PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > This is just the followup on said discussion, involving the larger LKML
> > audience, in order to get this fixed for good. As said, it is just a mere
> > technicality to get o
kernel-latest-2.4-s390_2.4.27-1_s390.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
kernel-latest-2.4-s390_2.4.27-1.dsc
kernel-latest-2.4-s390_2.4.27-1.tar.gz
kernel-headers-2.4-s390_2.4.27-1_s390.deb
kernel-image-2.4-s390_2.4.27-1_s390.deb
kernel-image-2.4-s390x_2.4.27-
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 04:16:47PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> This is just the followup on said discussion, involving the larger LKML
> audience, in order to get this fixed for good. As said, it is just a mere
> technicality to get out of the muddy situation, all the people having
> contributed so
(new) kernel-headers-2.6.11-1-s390_2.6.11-1_s390.deb optional devel
Header files related to Linux kernel version 2.6.11 on IBM S/390
This package provides kernel header files for version 2.6.11 on IBM S/390.
(new) kernel-headers-2.6.11-1-s390x_2.6.11-1_s390.deb optional devel
Header files related
(new) kernel-headers-2.6-s390_2.6.8-1_s390.deb optional devel
Header files related to latest Linux kernel version 2.6 on IBM S/390
This package will always depend on the latest 2.6 kernel headers available
for IBM S/390.
(new) kernel-headers-2.6-s390x_2.6.8-1_s390.deb optional devel
Header files
kernel-latest-2.6-s390_2.6.8-1_s390.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
kernel-latest-2.6-s390_2.6.8-1.dsc
kernel-latest-2.6-s390_2.6.8-1.tar.gz
kernel-headers-2.6-s390_2.6.8-1_s390.deb
kernel-headers-2.6-s390x_2.6.8-1_s390.deb
kernel-image-2.6-s390_2.6.8-1_s3
kernel-image-2.6.11-s390_2.6.11-1_s390.changes uploaded successfully to
localhost
along with the files:
kernel-image-2.6.11-s390_2.6.11-1.dsc
kernel-image-2.6.11-s390_2.6.11-1.tar.gz
kernel-image-2.6.11-1-s390_2.6.11-1_s390.deb
kernel-headers-2.6.11-1-s390_2.6.11-1_s390.deb
kernel-image-
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 12:41:33PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 12:08:18AM +0900, Horms wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 11:55:27AM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > > On Wed, 30 Mar 2005, Horms wrote:
> > > > > It is much more user-friendly, and it readly provi
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 09:26:58AM -0400, Michael Poole wrote:
> Sven Luther writes:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> >
> > Current linux kernel source hold undistributable non-free firmware blobs,
> > and
> > to consider them as mere agregation, a clear licence statement from the
> > copyright holders of sai
Sven Luther writes:
> Hello,
>
>
> Current linux kernel source hold undistributable non-free firmware blobs, and
> to consider them as mere agregation, a clear licence statement from the
> copyright holders of said non-free firmware blobls is needed, read below for
> details.
>
>
> Please keep e
On Mon, 04 Apr 2005, Sven Luther wrote:
> No, the packages would still be kernel-*-2.6.11, but the version number would
> be 2.6.11.6-, yiedling stuff like :
>
> kernel-source-2.6.11_2.6.11.6-1_all.deb
>
> Which is ok, and doesn't trigger NEW. I vote for that.
Which is what I thought would ha
On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 12:08:18AM +0900, Horms wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 11:55:27AM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > On Wed, 30 Mar 2005, Horms wrote:
> > > > It is much more user-friendly, and it readly provides information on the
> > > > most up-to-date tree it was synced wit
Dropping debian-boot, as i don't think further discussion concerns them.
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 09:58:05AM +0200, Gabriel Paubert wrote:
> > Plans on my part for 2.6 powerpc kernels are :
> >
> > 1) abandonement of the ppc32 power3 and power4 kernels in favour of ppc64
> > variants.
>
> Fi
On Mon, 2005-04-04 at 09:58 +0200, Gabriel Paubert wrote:
> As I said above, some embedded CPU really need different mm handling.
> BookE is an abomination, and fun with the 64 bit BookE implemetations
> if they come one day: they use different instruction encoding than
> standard PPC64.
I think
(new) kernel-build-2.6.11-power3-smp_2.6.11-1_powerpc.deb optional devel
build infrastructure for kernel version 2.6.11-power3-smp
.
Together with kernel-headers-2.6.11-powerpc, this package provides the
infrastructure for building additional modules for 2.6.11-power3-smp.
(new) kernel-build-2.6
kernel-patch-powerpc-2.6.11_2.6.11-1_powerpc.changes uploaded successfully to
localhost
along with the files:
kernel-patch-powerpc-2.6.11_2.6.11-1.dsc
kernel-patch-powerpc-2.6.11_2.6.11-1.tar.gz
kernel-headers-2.6.11-powerpc_2.6.11-1_powerpc.deb
kernel-image-2.6.11-power3_2.6.11-1_powerpc.
Hello,
Current linux kernel source hold undistributable non-free firmware blobs, and
to consider them as mere agregation, a clear licence statement from the
copyright holders of said non-free firmware blobls is needed, read below for
details.
Please keep everyone in the CC, as not everyone read
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 08:41:58AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> Hello,
>
> It seems as the 2.4.27 and 2.6.8 kernels which are sarge release candidates
> are now frozen, and will be part of sarge as is, complete with all the bugs
> and problems present in them, and maybe even some security issues wh
(new) kernel-nonfree-modules-2.6.11-1-386_2.6.11-1_i386.deb optional
non-free/devel
Linux kernel driver non-free modules from 2.6.11
This package provides Linux kernel modules from 2.6.11 that are
considered non-free by Debian. Some of the modules contained
within this package include tg3, key
kernel-source-nonfree-2.6.11_2.6.11-1_i386.changes uploaded successfully to
localhost
along with the files:
kernel-source-nonfree-2.6.11_2.6.11-1.dsc
kernel-source-nonfree-2.6.11_2.6.11.orig.tar.gz
kernel-source-nonfree-2.6.11_2.6.11-1.diff.gz
kernel-nonfree-source_2.6.11-1_all.deb
kerne
63 matches
Mail list logo
