I no longer have the (damaged and useless) installation attempt
that led to this report. I recall that when I succeeded in
supplying brcmfmac43340-sdio.bin, the next installation attempt
presented the same type of error message, asking for brcmfmac43340-sdio.txt
I found a file with that name
r brcm/brcmfmac43340-sdio.bin
>
>Dave Dyer wrote:
>> At 05:40 AM 1/18/2021, Holger Wansing wrote:
>> >> 3) in my particular case, the driver is brcm/brcmfmac43340-sdio.bin, which
>> >> *also* requires a text file, brcm/brcmfmac43340-sdio.txt. I know this
>>
pfifo_fast vs sch fq over here, with the most relevant
comment here:
https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/9725#issuecomment-413369212
--
Make Music, Not War
Dave Täht
CTO, TekLibre, LLC
http://www.teklibre.com
Tel: 1-831-435-0729
Hi there,
We've been able to work around this thanks to Ben's help, but are Debian
planning on releasing an update to fix this regression caused by the
9.12 point release?
Cheers,
Dave
--
Dave Page, Operations Team ManagerCodethink Ltd
Telephone: +44 7762 840 414
Package: src:linux
Version: 4.19.37-3
Severity: critical
Justification: breaks the whole system
Dear Maintainer,
I performed a fresh install using the image debian-testing-amd64-xfce-CD-1.iso
and after installation I could not boot to the desktop, I was left with a black
screen.
I entered tty1
. I also have a dell laptop that has Intel Graphics HD
520 that I upgraded to the 4.9.0-4-amd kernel and the problem does not
seem to affect it. Looks like it might be some incompatibility between
the 4.9.0-4 kernel and the intel 5500 graphics?
Thanks
Dave
Package: linux-image-4.9.0-3-amd64
Version: 4.9.30-2+deb9u2
OOPS with kernel (4.9) in debian stable stretch:
When trying to boot with new debian stable (kernel 4.9), I get a kernel
oops: http://imgur.com/a/CybMP It seems probably related to nouveau, as
you see in the backtrace. (I end up
Package: linux-image-3.16.0-4-amd64
Version: 3.16.43-2+deb8u2
OOPS with kernel (4.9) in debian stable stretch:
When trying to boot with new debian stable (kernel 4.9), I get a kernel
oops: http://imgur.com/a/CybMP It seems to be related to nouveau, as you
see in the backtrace. (I end up
Package: linux-image-3.16.0-4-amd64:
Version: 3.16.43-2+deb8u2
OOPS with kernel (4.9) in debian stable stretch:
When trying to boot with new debian stable (kernel 4.9), I get a kernel
oops: http://imgur.com/a/CybMP It seems probably related to nouveau, as
you see in the backtrace. (I end up
On 06/07/2017 01:14 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-06-07 at 18:10 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>>> CONFIG_SERIAL_8250_RUNTIME_UARTS=16
>> That seems reasonable.
> [...]
>
> Actually, having looked further at what this does, I'm unconvinced
> about changing it. It can always be
Package: linux-image-4.9.0-3-amd64
Severity: medium
When my system boots the Debian installer, it appears to hang at a blank
screen. There are two reasons for this, and two kernel configuration
parameters need to be modified:
CONFIG_SERIAL_8250_RUNTIME_UARTS=16
CONFIG_SERIAL_8250_MID=y
There
I guess I wrote that badly.
busybox isn't actually required by cryptsetup, just recommended, but it
should be required by something. The example shows it's possible to
make packages uninstallable, if they pull the initramfs trigger, by
removing busybox, which you can do cleanly as far as apt is
Package: initramfs-tools
Version: 0.130
Severity: normal
Dear Maintainer,
initramfs-tools-core recommends busybox, but it appears to be required.
I got this with an update after it was removed:
Processing triggers for initramfs-tools (0.130) ...
update-initramfs: Generating
kt:
>
> commit 9de67c3ba9ea961ba420573d56479d09d33a7587
> Author: Eric Sandeen <sand...@redhat.com>
> Date: Thu Jul 24 20:51:54 2014 +1000
>
> xfs: allow inode allocations in post-growfs disk space
Acked-by: Dave Chinner <da...@fromorbit.com>
--
Dave Chinner
da...@fromorbit.com
OK - narrowed it down.
tested the pre-built 3.15.5-1~exp1 which works, and 3.16~rc5-1~exp1, and
the latter breaks in the way I'm seeing.
Dave
On 6 January 2015 at 10:36, Ian Campbell i...@debian.org wrote:
On Mon, 2015-01-05 at 23:34 +, Dave Williams wrote:
Hi Ben,
OK - so far I've
it depends on), then I can try them. Otherwise
I'll just keep doing what I'm doing... Next one I've downloaded source for
is 3.16.2. I'll let you know how that one pans out.
Cheers,
Dave
On 4 January 2015 at 19:51, Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk wrote:
Control: tag -1 moreinfo
Control
information on request (please let me know where I
can find the info when asking for it though)
or try out patched kernels (preferably supplied as '.deb' packages please :-) ).
Thank you for your time!
Dave
-- Package-specific info:
** Kernel log: boot messages should be attached
** Model
.
Dave.
--
Dave Ewart
da...@ceu.ox.ac.uk
Computing Manager, Cancer Epidemiology Unit
University of Oxford
N 51.7516, W 1.2152
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
0, 1 and 2 for a rewind, and the . and ..
entries. jfs was using 0 and 1 for . and .., but 2 for a regular entry.
This patch makes jfs conform by using 1 and 2 for . and .. and fixes
any regular entry using the value 2.
Signed-off-by: Dave Kleikamp dave.kleik...@oracle.com
diff --git a/fs/jfs
On 08/15/2013 02:09 AM, Christian Kujau wrote:
On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 at 21:29, Christian Kujau wrote:
On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 at 22:54, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
It looks like the problem is that jfs was using a cookie value of 2 for
a real directory entry, where NFSv4 expect 2 to represent
entry. This incompatibility
can result in the nfs client reporting a readdir loop.
This patch doesn't change the value stored internally, but adds one to
the value exposed to the iterate method.
Signed-off-by: Dave Kleikamp dave.kleik...@oracle.com
---
fs/jfs/jfs_dtree.c | 31
On 08/15/2013 04:26 PM, Christian Kujau wrote:
On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 at 15:48, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
This patch replaces the one I posted yesterday. I like this better since
it doesn't require fixing existing on-disk cookies or skipping a
position in the in-inode index table.
Thanks. Applied
On 01/30/2013 04:51 AM, Pavel Machek wrote:
Are you saying that HIGHMEM configuration with 4GB ram is not expected
to work?
Not really.
The assertion was that 4GB with no PAE passed a forkbomb test (ooming)
while 4GB of RAM with PAE hung, thus _PAE_ is broken.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On 01/17/2013 01:04 PM, paul.sz...@sydney.edu.au wrote:
On my large machine, 'free' fails to show about 2GB memory ...
You probably have a memory hole. ...
The e820 map (during early boot in dmesg) or /proc/iomem will let you
locate your memory holes.
Now that my machine is running an amd64
On 01/11/2013 07:31 PM, paul.sz...@sydney.edu.au wrote:
Seems that any i386 PAE machine will go OOM just by running a few
processes. To reproduce:
sh -c 'n=0; while [ $n -lt 1 ]; do sleep 600 ((n=n+1)); done'
My machine has 64GB RAM. With previous OOM episodes, it seemed that
running
On 01/14/2013 12:36 PM, paul.sz...@sydney.edu.au wrote:
I understand that more RAM leaves less lowmem. What is unacceptable is
that PAE crashes or freezes with OOM: it should gracefully handle the
issue. Noting that (for a machine with 4GB or under) PAE fails where the
HIGHMEM4G kernel
On 01/10/2013 05:46 PM, paul.sz...@sydney.edu.au wrote:
... I don't believe 64GB of RAM has _ever_ been booted on a 32-bit
kernel without either violating the ABI (3GB/1GB split) or doing
something that never got merged upstream ...
Sorry to be so contradictory:
psz@como:~$ uname -a
On 01/10/2013 01:58 PM, paul.sz...@sydney.edu.au wrote:
I developed a workaround patch for this particular OOM demo, dropping
filesystem caches when about to exhaust lowmem. However, subsequently
I observed OOM when running many processes (as yet I do not have an
easy-to-reproduce demo of
On 01/10/2013 04:46 PM, paul.sz...@sydney.edu.au wrote:
Your configuration has never worked. This isn't a regression ...
... does not mean that we expect it to work.
Do you mean that CONFIG_HIGHMEM64G is deprecated, should not be used;
that all development is for 64-bit only?
My last 4GB
years ago
Dave
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120713210240.gg1...@redhat.com
more on the niche platforms, but x86[64] ? I'm sceptical they're used at
all)
Dave
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120713215546.gh1
was a symlink to
/sbin/udevadm which has been absent from Debian since Lenny.
Try editing this file to replace the above with:
if [ -x $(command -v udevadm) ]; then
verbose log_begin_msg Waiting for udev to process events
udevadm settle --timeout=10
verbose log_end_msg
fi
Dave
This email
upstream who is responsible for the
deb-pkg infrastructure?
Thanks,
Dave W.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f138823.8080...@sbcglobal.net
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 09:52:36PM +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
Please could you ack or nak this?
Ben.
sorry, thought I already had.
Reviewed-by: Dave Jones da...@redhat.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble
Wow. Almost 3 years later and this is still broken.
Dave
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/c59d3f5c-850f-4e61-a470-2b3ea2b97...@ocean.net.au
() ?
Dave
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20111027015528.ga19...@redhat.com
,
as dynamic debug lockdep are separate things, though this was the only
thing in kernel/module.c's history this year that sounds similar)
Dave
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
.
Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk
---
Debian has been carrying this for the last few kernel versions. The
recent thread '[RFC] virtualbox tainting.' and discussions at KS suggest
that this might be more generally useful.
Looks good to me.
Reviewed-by: Dave Jones da
. Benjamin Herrenschmidt (CC'd) was
working on a fix for this, any progress Ben?
* Come to think of it, the OFfb handover probably only works for
me thanks to a patch drm/radeon: Add early unregister of
firmware fb's by BenH. Ben/Dave, what's the status
On 15 October 2010 02:33, Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk wrote:
On Thu, 2010-10-14 at 15:16 +0100, Dave Clarke wrote:
Ben
That has solved it. Now getting around 27MB/s write on ext4 and 97MB/s
read with the experimental kernel. I'm happy with these speeds on this
hardware. It is still
and
vm.dirty_ratio. Do you think there is any merit in adjusting these?
Thanks
Dave
On 14 October 2010 03:46, Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk wrote:
On Thu, 2010-10-14 at 00:31 +0100, Dave Clarke wrote:
Running bonnie++ locally. Have formatted / as ext3 and /home/ as ext4.
using raid5. Also to note
(ext4 won't mount with 2.6.26 kernel).
And meminfo for both kernels taken when the system is loaded and unloaded.
Dave
On 13 October 2010 00:15, Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk wrote:
On Tue, 2010-10-12 at 23:07 +0100, Dave Clarke wrote:
Package: linux-image
Version: 2.6.32-5-686
After dist
Package: nfs-kernel-server
Version: 1:1.1.2-6lenny2
Severity: important
In the maintaner scripts included in nfs-kernel-server ucf is
used to detect whether the configfiles
managed by the scripts have been changed via a local edit. However the
postinst makes no inquiry against ucf
On 09/13/2010 03:30 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Mon, 2010-09-13 at 14:38 -0700, Dave Rawks wrote:
Package: nfs-kernel-server
Version: 1:1.1.2-6lenny2
Severity: important
In the maintaner scripts included in nfs-kernel-server ucf is
used to detect whether the configfiles
managed
On 9/13/10 5:20 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
severity 596767 wishlist
thanks
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 02:38:25PM -0700, Dave Rawks wrote:
In the maintaner scripts included in nfs-kernel-server ucf is
used to detect whether the configfiles
managed by the scripts have been changed via
Package: linux-2.6
Severity: normal
I believe this is another case of a user needing
acpi_enforce_resources=lax in their kernel boot parameters.
Ferry, can you try the advice provided here,
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=568126#44
and see if it helps.
HTH,
Dave W
I'm no expert on kernel matters, but this looks like another instance of
someone being affected by the relatively recent change in upstream
kernel policy toward ACPI resource overlaps.
Possibly adding this to the kernel boot parameters would help:
acpi_enforce_resources=lax
HTH,
Dave W
Thanks for an awesome foundation. Big Love.
--
This is message was sent to you from http://thanks.debian.net
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 9:30 AM, Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk wrote:
FB_VIA now selects GPIOLIB, but that is not available on all
architectures. Change FB_VIA dependencies to include GPIOLIB
dependencies.
If you can find a via chipset on anything not x86 I'd be impressed.
Dave
, in case it is
helpful in some way. I will soon be adding NFSv4 support to my home
network -- long overdue -- and the nfsvers=3 workaround wasn't very
difficult to use anyway.)
Dave W.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: squeeze/sid
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (990, 'unstable'), (350
Hi
Please cancel this bug. The disk has had a catastrophic failure so the
reports in the log were valid.
Sorry for any investigation work this has incurred.
Kind regards
--
..
Dave Edwards (G7RAU)
email:
d...@g7rau.co.uk
Web:
http://g7rau.demon.co.uk
in Debian and try then no problems
at all and data access is fast.
I have flashed the Mb to the latest version and replaced all the sata cables
but no improvement.
This looks like a bug to me, anybody have any ideas?
Kind regards
--
..
Dave Edwards (G7RAU)
email:
d
better raid performance (mysql
record inserts are intermittant / slow and reads are slow) and I have a
feeling this is all relating to the same thing but I cannot identify
what it is
Kind regards
--
..
Dave Edwards (G7RAU)
email:
d...@g7rau.co.uk
Web:
http
kernel install.
for the time being i've just blacklisted the module.
Best regards
Dave Williams
- Original message -
reassign 574401 linux-2.6
thanks
On Mar 17, Dave Williams d.r.williams...@cantab.net wrote:
If 'udevadm trigger' is run once the system is booted and running
kernel boot line in GRUB.
HTH,
Dave W.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: squeeze/sid
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (990, 'unstable'), (350, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.32.2-0git+k10temp+f71889fg+r600fix.091222.desktop.kms (SMP
w/4 CPU cores; PREEMPT
that confusion here had anything to do with it, but now I have something
else to look into, at least. The machine doesn't roll over and die, so
I can still get in with 'ssh' and do the downgrade. Just haven't had
time to gather info and debug the issue yet.)
HTH,
Dave W.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE
to get the 60 sec delay that Stefan referred to. (Only
delay I experienced was that it takes 5 times longer to build one of
these kitchen-sink kernels than with my carefully crafted custom
config! ;)
Thanks for investigating this,
Dave W.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: squeeze/sid
APT
Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Wed, 2009-12-16 at 11:49 -0500, Dave Witbrodt wrote:
[...]
May I provide evidence to the contrary?
I compile my own kernels, and use them exclusively unless some problem
arises which forces me to use another kernel. Therefore, I keep a stock
Debian kernel installed
a new bug report, or is merely providing
this anecdote sufficient?
HTH,
Dave W.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: squeeze/sid
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (990, 'unstable'), (350, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-0git091206.desktop.vesa (SMP w/4 CPU
Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Wed, 2009-12-16 at 11:49 -0500, Dave Witbrodt wrote:
When 2.6.32-truck (AMD64 here) was released, I tried switching to that
for my Debian backup kernel... but it hangs in boot, with some very
nasty backtracing. It does print the warning about missing firmware
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 16:02:09 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 09:49:11AM -0400, Dave Witbrodt wrote:
[...]
Has the kernel team decided to no longer make DEBs available for
upcoming versions of kernels? Or will the 'experimental'
distribution be used to make
that your notes from the Plumber's Conference do not
seem to mention the loss of 'kernel-archive' at all. Was this not
discussed at all? Is 'kernel-archive' gone permanently?
Sincerely,
Dave W.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe
On Tue, 15 Sep 2009 09:39:59 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
It is down after a catastrophic UPS failure.
Wow... bummer. Will it be resuscitated or has it been abandoned?
Dave W.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
to be versioned dependencies, so hopefully everything has been OK all
along?)
Sincere thanks,
Dave W.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Package: linux-image-2.6.26-2-686
Version: 2.6.26-15
Severity: important
After upgrading a SuperMicro SuperServer 5013-MT server from etch to lenny I
started getting numerous hard resets on all of the sata ports. The 4-port sata
controller is a Marvell MV88SX5041. Looking around a bit it seems
description for the Xen kernel to mention
this, or for the package to depend or recommend the full Xen system?
A simple description line reading If you want to run this kernel as a Xen
host (dom0), look at the xen-linux-system-2.6.26-1-xen-amd64 package would
help.
Dave
--
Dave Page [EMAIL
Package: linux-image-2.6.26-1-amd64
Version: 2.6.26-*
Followup-For: Bug #493479
After originally filing this bug report here on the Debian BTS, I
performed a kernel bisection and took my findings to the LKML. About
3 weeks later, the problem had finally been correctly diagnosed:
changes between
, it's what I'm using to submit this bug
report ;)
Dave
-- System Information:
Debian Release: lenny/sid
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (500, 'testing')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.26-1-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_GB.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF
if that just told me to install a kernel documentation package.
Dave
--
Dave Page [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 2008-10-16 at 07:24 -0700, Tom Epperly wrote:
When I shutdown after reporting the bug, the machine didn't shutdown
smoothly.
This is common after seeing a BUG() in the kernel. The trapping kernel
thread terminates without cleaning up after itself. It may be holding
locks that cause
On Wed, 2008-10-15 at 22:49 -0700, Tom Epperly wrote:
I followed up in /var/log/syslog and found:
Oct 15 21:09:12 faerun kernel: [11052.080364] BUG at
fs/jfs/jfs_metapage.c:742 assert(mp-count)
Oct 15 21:09:13 faerun kernel: [11052.080424] [ cut here
]
Oct 15
.)
- If upstream does not push the fix into stable 2.6.26.X, but Debian is
interested in a patch, would you folks be more interested in a patch
that reverts back to 2.6.25 behavior (safer?) or a patch which applies
the new fix which uses a (possibly riskier?) quirk-based approach?
Dave W
sources, then it could lead to all sorts of other problems
down the road.
Thanks,
Dave Witbrodt
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Package: linux-image-2.6.26-1-amd64
Version: 2.6.26-1
Followup-For: Bug #493479
I worked on finding a config for 2.6.26 last night that would allow it to
boot, until I got too tired to continue. As mentioned previously, the
stock kernel freezes on this system early during the boot process; my
Package: linux-image-2.6.26-1-amd64
Version: 2.6.26-1
Followup-For: Bug #493479
After removing all of the boot parameters for debugging as mentioned in my
last message, I then began removing the parameters which disable kernel
features one at time. The result was that I could remove all of the
Package: linux-image-2.6.26-1-amd64
Version: 2.6.26-1
Severity: critical
Justification: breaks the whole system
[NB: I refer below to self-compiled kernels a bit, but this report IS
against the stock kernel.]
I saw that there is a push to get 2.6.26 into Lenny, so when
Package: linux-image-2.6.26-1-amd64
Version: 2.6.26-1
Followup-For: Bug #493479
CORRECTION: The motherboard on the machine where linux-image-2.6.26-1-amd64
refuses to boot is an ECS AMD690GM-M2, not ECS AMD790GM-M2 (a little
misspelling there).
The last kernel I compiled before filing the bug
Package: linux-image-2.6.26-1-amd64
Version: 2.6.26-1
Followup-For: Bug #493479
Well, I really believed I had found a way to isolate the config option that
was causing the kernel to freeze. Of the list of options I listed in my
previous message, I found that only 7 could be manually configured
Package: linux-image-2.6.18-4-xen-amd64
Version: 2.6.18.dfsg.1-12etch2
It appears that the 2.6.18-4 kernel in Etch does not support 8250 serial
devices. I see the following messages in dmesg when I boot up:
Serial: 8250/16550 driver $Revision: 1.90 $ 4 ports, IRQ sharing enabled
8250_pnp:
My knowledge of the DRM is weak, but as I understand it, the only time
it is used is by the ioctl handlers, and not by userspace. I've added
Dave Airlie to the CC list, hopefully he can enlighten us as to where
else cmpxchg is used.
Unless something %100 inside of the kernel will be the only
Posting to list...
Please direct further discussion on this topic to my mail on
linux-kernel. Thanks.
Which can be found here:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/12/21/157
Excellent explanation.
--
Dave Hylands
Vancouver, BC, Canada
http://www.DaveHylands.com/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
Package: linux-image-2.6.16-1-686
Version: 2.6.16-7
Severity: normal
The advansys module (for advansys SCSI cards) is no longer part of the
package. It was available in linux-image-2.6.15-1-686.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500,
Package: linux-image-2.6-sparc64-2.6.15-1-sparc64
Severity: important
I get the following trying to boot on a v210:
...
scsi1 : sym-2.2.1
SCSI device sda: 71132959 512-byte hdwr sectors (36420 MB)
SCSI device sda: drive cache: write through
SCSI device sda: 71132959
Package: linux-image-2.6.15-1-sparc64
Version: 2.6.15-2
Severity: minor
The package linux-doc-2.6.15 that is suggested doesn't exist. I
assume that should be linux-manual-2.6.15.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
APT prefers stable
APT policy: (900, 'stable')
Architecture: sparc
or hard links.
Hence failing to make a backup link for the existing kernel image
should not be a fatal error for installing the package. At least, not
a fatal error that can't be overridden somehow, as --force-all still
fails...
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE
Jurij Smakov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
To test whether the problems you are
experiencing are due to the wrong MCLK value, you can try setting it
by adding a kernel boot argument
video=atyfb:mclk=100
The framebuffer output is similar, just in bigger characters (fewer
lines per screen).
Jurij Smakov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thanks for testing. Can you try tweaking you X configuration file as
described in http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-288023.html, and see
if it helps in any way with the mouse problem?
The only difference between the mouse section given there and mine
Package: kernel-image-2.6.11-1-sparc64
Version: 2.6.11-5
Severity: normal
I have this kernel running OK on a headless system, but it seems to be
non-useful on the console. This is on a Blade 100 running OBP 4.15.7,
in case that's relevant.
The console output is messed up. The first column is
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 07:43:54PM +0900, Horms wrote:
Thanks,
I have CCed the relevant maintainers for their comment.
The AGP change already went into Linus' tree, along with
removal of the _MCH driver.
Dave
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED
, but they include reports of
problems with both SMP and RAID (not just XFS, even with EXT3, which I
use), so I don't see that as being an option either, even if I were to put
something from unstable on my system.
I really hope a working kernel gets into sarge.
dave [EMAIL PROTECTED
[c0105e6e] ret_from_fork+0x6/0x14
[ca9bb9cf] hub_thread+0x0/0xe4 [usbcore]
[c0116fb4] autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x3a
[c01041e1] kernel_thread_helper+0x5/0xb
Code: 0f 0b 66 05 d2 e2 25 c0 8b 6d 00 8b 45 00 8d 74 26 00 81 fd
Regards,
Dave Bingham
://www.chambersharrap.co.uk/chambers/chref/chref.py/main?query=programmetitle=21st
Americans use program for everything, so using programme here is wrong
for everyone ;-)
'program' is what I plumped for too, and thats whats currently
in cpufreq-bk.
Dave
.
Similar problems have happened with kernel-image-2.4.25-1-k7, I'm now going
down to kernel-image-2.4.25-1-386 to see if that helps.
Definitely not heat related, bios reported temps of 41 deg C afterwards. Memory
has passed 10 passes of memtest86 too.
Any ideas?
--
Dave Trudgian - Cornish
93 matches
Mail list logo
