I've run into a problem which produces the same behavior as bug #934160,
but attributed it elsewhere due to other observations.
What are the version(s) of the Linux kernel being used on your server and
clients?
I've confirmed using a 4.9 kernel on a client instead of a 4.19 kernel
also works
On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 08:36:31PM +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> This now let some rings bell, the described scenario is very similar
> to what was reported in https://bugs.debian.org/934160
>
> Respectively
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nfs-utils/+bug/1779736 and
>
Hi Elliott,
Thanks for the additional information.
On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 10:43:49AM -0700, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 08:44:26AM +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 10:16:07PM -0700, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
> > > Somewhere between
On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 08:44:26AM +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 10:16:07PM -0700, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
> > Somewhere between linux-image-4.19.0-8-amd64/4.19.98+1+deb10u1 and
> > linux-image-4.19.0-9-amd64/4.19.118+2 NFS, in particular v4 got broken.
> >
On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 03:08:55PM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> Is POWER5 still supported by the Linux kernel? I thought IBM removed a
> bunch of older machines but kept PowerPC 970 support.
4.17 dropped power4. power5 and up are still supported just fine.
--
Len Sorensen
On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 08:37:02AM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> I would like to switch the ppc64 kernel back to 4k pages. The majority
> of our users are people on G5 Macs anyway, so I don't see a point
> in using 64k pages.
>
> Anyone with a large modern POWER machine is going to
On 6/5/20 3:03 PM, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
>> Anyone with a large modern POWER machine is going to run the ppc64el
>> port anyway.
>
> Only power8 and newer can run ppc64el, so all power 5, 6 and 7 users
> would still need to run be. But there are probably a lot less than of
> G5 users. And
binary:linux-image-4.19.0-0.bpo.9-686 is NEW.
binary:linux-image-4.19.0-0.bpo.9-686-pae is NEW.
binary:linux-image-4.19.0-0.bpo.9-rt-686-pae is NEW.
Your package has been put into the NEW queue, which requires manual action
from the ftpteam to process. The upload was otherwise valid (it had a
linux-signed-i386_4.19.118+2~bpo9+1_source.changes uploaded successfully to
localhost
along with the files:
linux-signed-i386_4.19.118+2~bpo9+1.dsc
linux-signed-i386_4.19.118+2~bpo9+1.tar.xz
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon (running on host usper.debian.org)
binary:linux-image-4.19.0-0.bpo.9-arm64 is NEW.
binary:linux-image-4.19.0-0.bpo.9-rt-arm64 is NEW.
Your package has been put into the NEW queue, which requires manual action
from the ftpteam to process. The upload was otherwise valid (it had a good
OpenPGP signature and file hashes are valid), so
linux-signed-arm64_4.19.118+2~bpo9+1_source.changes uploaded successfully to
localhost
along with the files:
linux-signed-arm64_4.19.118+2~bpo9+1.dsc
linux-signed-arm64_4.19.118+2~bpo9+1.tar.xz
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon (running on host usper.debian.org)
binary:linux-image-4.19.0-0.bpo.9-amd64 is NEW.
binary:linux-image-4.19.0-0.bpo.9-cloud-amd64 is NEW.
binary:linux-image-4.19.0-0.bpo.9-rt-amd64 is NEW.
Your package has been put into the NEW queue, which requires manual action
from the ftpteam to process. The upload was otherwise valid (it had a
linux-signed-amd64_4.19.118+2~bpo9+1_source.changes uploaded successfully to
localhost
along with the files:
linux-signed-amd64_4.19.118+2~bpo9+1.dsc
linux-signed-amd64_4.19.118+2~bpo9+1.tar.xz
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon (running on host usper.debian.org)
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> notfound 962254 4.19.118+2
Bug #962254 [src:linux] NFS(v4) broken at 4.19.118-2
The source 'linux' and version '4.19.118+2' do not appear to match any binary
packages
No longer marked as found in versions linux/4.19.118+2.
> found 962254
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2020-06-05 4:44 a.m., Nicholas D Steeves wrote:
> Michel Dänzer writes:
>> On 2020-05-31 12:16 a.m., Nicholas D Steeves wrote:
>>
>>> The only thing I'm not sure about is if additional Xorg
>>> components would additionally need to be backported.
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 + moreinfo unreproducible
Bug #962254 [src:linux] NFS(v4) broken at 4.19.118-2
Added tag(s) unreproducible and moreinfo.
--
962254: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=962254
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with
Control: tags -1 + moreinfo unreproducible
Control: notfound -1 4.19.118+2
Control: found -1 4.19.118-2
Hi Elliot,
On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 10:16:07PM -0700, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
> Package: src:linux
> Version: 4.19.118+2
> Severity: important
>
> Somewhere between
Hi Ben!
> I'm sorry this is still unresolved. I have a couple of questions:
>
> * How will people discover this and know that they should use it? If
> the installer is still being updated for ppc64, shouldn't we select
> this kernel automatically when an Nvidia PCI device is detected?
>
> *
18 matches
Mail list logo
