Bug#901006: closed by Ben Hutchings (Re: Bug#901006: linux-image-4.16.0-2-amd64: "core has locked up" kernel messagee)

On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 2:27 AM, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: > -- Forwarded message -- > From: Ben Hutchings > To: 901006-d...@bugs.debian.org > Cc: > Bcc: > Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2018 02:24:57 +0100 > Subject: Re: Bug#901006: linux-image-4.16.0-2-amd64: "core has locked up" >

Bug#855558: linux-image-4.9.0-1-amd64: ACPI boot error causes /sbin/init to segfault (!)

faakin 'ell :) woo, ok. setting acpi_os_name="Windows 2009" and also removing vesafb from /etc/initramfs-tools/modules resulted in a boot (attaching dmesg boot which contains two ACPI-related kernel-level warnings). sorry it's an attachment rather than inline. i don't know if it was the setting

Bug#855558: linux-image-4.9.0-1-amd64: ACPI boot error causes /sbin/init to segfault (!)

--- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 12:06 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote: > Control: retitle -1 linux-image-4.9.0-1-amd64: Failed to execute /init > Control: tag -1 moreinfo > > On Mon, 20 Feb 2017 04:00:03 +

Bug#855558: linux-image-4.9.0-1-amd64: ACPI boot error causes /sbin/init to segfault (!)

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-from-scratch-13/acpi-errors-when-booting-927408/ ah christ almighty, they're talking about "updating the bios fixes the problem" *sigh*. 3.16, 4.7 and 4.8 are all fine - so wtf is 4.9 doing not being capable of running /init when all prior version

Bug#855818: linux-image-4.8.0-2-amd64: segfault in intel 9815 drm kernel module

--- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 2:38 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote: > Control: tag -1 - upstream > Control: tag -1 moreinfo > > On Wed, 2017-02-22 at 01:45 +, lkcl wrote: >> Package: src:linux >> Version:

Bug#776959: linux-image-3.16.0-4-amd64: [regression] sd card reader in retina macbook pro no longer working

On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 7:58 PM, Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk wrote: Control: tag -1 important On Tue, 2015-02-03 at 15:39 +, lkcl wrote: Package: src:linux Version: 3.16.7-ckt2-1 Severity: important after upgrading from 3.13 where the built-in sd card worked perfectly, there is

Bug#776959: linux-image-3.16.0-4-amd64: [regression] sd card reader in retina macbook pro no longer working

On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 9:28 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton l...@lkcl.net wrote: On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 7:58 PM, Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk wrote: Control: tag -1 important On Tue, 2015-02-03 at 15:39 +, lkcl wrote: Package: src:linux Version: 3.16.7-ckt2-1 Severity: important

Bug#745147: closed by Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk (Re: WARNING on removal of SCSI device which is still in use)

thanks for keeping an eye on this ben On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 2:42 PM, Debian Bug Tracking System ow...@bugs.debian.org wrote: Subject: Re: WARNING on removal of SCSI device which is still in use Version: 3.15~rc5-1~exp1 This is supposed to be fixed in 3.15-rc1 by: commit

Bug#744994: linux-image-3.13-1-amd64: segfault on use of external (usb) dvdrw

On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 2:11 PM, Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk wrote: Apr 17 09:24:08 teenymac kernel: [1201449.213969] usb 2-5: USB disconnect, device number 18 Drive removed. yes. bit of a melt-down on another USB hub, i had to unplug it (and the attached

Re: Bug#730482: linux-image-3.9.6: PCI/USB reset not being done on Geode LX800 / CS5536

On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Kernel Maintainers, Since the package doesn't exist this landed in the wrong place. Could you please have a look and take over the bug if useful? thanks andrei. i've since observed that the two ethernet ports

Re: ARM kernel config for Linux 3.11

On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 4:42 PM, Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk wrote: As discussed previously, I think PCI should be enabled for the armhf/armmp flavour as the Marvell Armada SoCs have PCIe interfaces. and the freescale iMX6, and one of the samsung SoCs (the exynos5), and the TI AM3389

Bug#721924: Acknowledgement (linux-image-3.10-2-amd64: btrfs writing several small files causes massive load spike)

https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=60860 cf upstream bugreport. On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Debian Bug Tracking System ow...@bugs.debian.org wrote: Thank you for filing a new Bug report with Debian. This is an automatically generated reply to let you know your message has been

Bug#715370: Acknowledgement (linux-image-3.9-1-486: CONFIG_GPIO_CS5535 has been set to 'y' when it should be 'M')

right. having enormous difficulty tracking this down, but there appears to be some kernel config dependencies of CONFIG_GPIO_CS5535 which are set to Y which are forcing CONFIG_GPIO_CS5535 to y. ... but that actually turns out not to be the main problem: the main problem is that although

Re: [Arm-netbook] getting allwinner SoC support upstream (was Re: Uploading linux (3.9.4-1))

On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 7:26 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux li...@arm.linux.org.uk wrote: Luke Leighton on the other hand is demanding that we no demands have been made, russell: i've informed you of an immovable deadline which will pass beyond which the opportunity being presented is lost.

Re: [Arm-netbook] getting allwinner SoC support upstream (was Re: Uploading linux (3.9.4-1))

On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 8:35 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux li...@arm.linux.org.uk wrote: On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 08:18:14PM +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 7:26 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux li...@arm.linux.org.uk wrote: Luke Leighton on the other hand

getting allwinner SoC support upstream (was Re: Uploading linux (3.9.4-1))

On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 3:52 AM, Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk wrote: The 3.8.y branch is over, so I think we have to move to 3.9, ready or not. I merged the work in progress from trunk to sid and am going through the config changes at the moment. I'm rather disappointed that nothing

Re: getting allwinner SoC support upstream (was Re: Uploading linux (3.9.4-1))

[i've just received word, please remove debian-release from discussions!] On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 9:46 PM, jonsm...@gmail.com jonsm...@gmail.com wrote: Why don't you try converting the sunxi code over to device tree? ok. perhaps i wasn't clear. whatever is proposed has to be be acceptable to

Re: getting allwinner SoC support upstream (was Re: Uploading linux (3.9.4-1))

[ please remove debian-release from future replies! my mistake - please don't propagate it, thanks ] On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 10:00 PM, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote: On 06/05/2013 02:46 PM, jonsm...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 3:46 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton l

Re: getting allwinner SoC support upstream (was Re: Uploading linux (3.9.4-1))

[ please do try to remove debian-release from replies - my mistake please try not to propagage it, even though it may be too late!] On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 10:16 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux li...@arm.linux.org.uk wrote: eyy, allo russell, long time since we last spoke, which was eek around 2004

Re: getting allwinner SoC support upstream (was Re: Uploading linux (3.9.4-1))

On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 10:52 PM, Tomasz Figa tomasz.f...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Luke, allo tomasz :) ok - much of what you say is duplicated by what russell said, so in effect the same reply is relevant, but there's been some cross-over. i'll summarise below and cut all but the key question

Re: getting allwinner SoC support upstream (was Re: Uploading linux (3.9.4-1))

[removing debian-release again - at their request] On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 11:11 PM, Tomasz Figa tomasz.f...@gmail.com wrote: Allwinner has just reinvented a wheel, without even considering the fact that it has been already invented. apologies, tomasz, but i believe i covered this issue in,

Re: getting allwinner SoC support upstream (was Re: Uploading linux (3.9.4-1))

On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 12:27 AM, Tomasz Figa tomasz.f...@gmail.com wrote: their sheer overwhelming success provides us with mass-volume ultra-low cost hardware. to not make an effort to accommodate them would in this specific instance be a huge missed opportunity, OK, this is a large

Bug#706476: Info received (Bug#706476: Info received (Bug#706476 closed by Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk (Re: Bug#706476: linux-image-3.2.0-4-486: amd geode gpio-cs5535 module not being compile

ok, it turns out that CONFIG_SYSFS_GPIO is safe, because you have to explicitly take action in order to make GPIO accessible (export). following the instructions here was easy to do: https://sites.google.com/site/bifferboard/Home/gpio so, basically, CONFIG_SYSFS_GPIO could be switched on (as

Bug#706476: closed by Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk (Re: Bug#706476: linux-image-3.2.0-4-486: amd geode gpio-cs5535 module not being compiled (needed for alix6f2))

On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 3:33 AM, Debian Bug Tracking System ow...@bugs.debian.org wrote: This is an automatic notification regarding your Bug report which was filed against the linux-image-3.2.0-4-486 package: #706476: linux-image-3.2.0-4-486: amd geode gpio-cs5535 module not being compiled

Bug#706476: closed by Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk (Re: Bug#706476: linux-image-3.2.0-4-486: amd geode gpio-cs5535 module not being compiled (needed for alix6f2))

On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 10:56 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton l...@lkcl.net wrote: It *is* still enabled, but it's built-in on the 486 flavour because OLPC_XO1_SCI selects it. thanks ben... investigating further: # PCI GPIO expanders: # CONFIG_GPIO_CS5535=y # CONFIG_GPIO_LANGWELL

Bug#706476: Info received (Bug#706476 closed by Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk (Re: Bug#706476: linux-image-3.2.0-4-486: amd geode gpio-cs5535 module not being compiled (needed for alix6f2)))

i've added these at the end of debian/config/i386/none/config.i486 and then checked debian/build/build_i386_none_486/.config but CONFIG_GPIO_CS5535 had been modified to y, ah well. fakeroot make -f debian/rules.gen -j16 binary-arch_i386_none_486 still running... # # GPIOLIB and SYSFS #

Bug#706476: linux-image-3.2.0-4-486: amd geode gpio-cs5535 module not being compiled (needed for alix6f2)

On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 6:39 PM, Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk wrote: On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 05:22:56PM +0100, lkcl wrote: Package: linux-image-3.2.0-4-486 Severity: important discovered from another debian bugreport that pc-engines systems can be upgraded to more recent firmware and

Re: Bug#636123: Info received (Bug#636123: linux-image-2.6.39-2-amd64: root filesystem not recognised - new bug report)

right - _finally_ i've encountered a requirement to upgrade a 2nd system that has lvm2 and (in this 2nd case 2.6.18-486) a linux kernel image, and have encountered the *exact* same problem as is in bugs 636123 and 638896. this time, however, i was anticipating that something might go wrong, so

Re: Bug#636123: linux-image-2.6.39-2-amd64: root filesystem (LVM) not recognised

Valentijn, this is very important: please can you keep and make available the initrd that was generated by initramfs-tools? the file is going to be /boot/initrd.img-2.6.38-2-{insert_arch_name} DO NOT attempt to recover the system right away (unless you take a backup of

Bug#636123: linux-image-2.6.39-2-amd64: root filesystem (LVM) not recognised

On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 7:21 PM, Valentijn Scholten valentijnschol...@hotmail.com wrote: Hello Luke, Thanks for jumping in. I only have a /boot/initrd.img-2.6.32-5-amd64 at the moment. This is the one probably generated (reinstalled) after I reinstalled Squeeze on top of the existing

Bug#636123: linux-image-2.6.39-2-amd64: root filesystem (LVM) not recognised

On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 7:42 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton l...@lkcl.net wrote: On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 7:21 PM, Valentijn Scholten valentijnschol...@hotmail.com wrote: Hello Luke, Thanks for jumping in. I only have a /boot/initrd.img-2.6.32-5-amd64 at the moment. This is the one probably

Re: Bug#636123: linux-image-2.6.39-2-amd64: root filesystem (LVM) not recognised

On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 7:35 PM, Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk wrote: On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 06:56:16PM +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: Valentijn, this is very important: please can you keep and make available the initrd that was generated by initramfs-tools

Bug#636123: linux-image-2.6.39-2-amd64: root filesystem (LVM) not recognised

On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 8:02 PM, Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk wrote: On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 07:55:28PM +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 7:42 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton l...@lkcl.net wrote: On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 7:21 PM, Valentijn Scholten

Re: Bug#636123: linux-image-2.6.39-2-amd64: root filesystem (LVM) not recognised

On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 7:54 PM, Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk wrote: On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 07:44:35PM +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 7:35 PM, Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk wrote: On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 06:56:16PM +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson

Bug#636123: linux-image-2.6.39-2-amd64: root filesystem not recognised - new bug report

On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 8:30 PM, Valentijn Scholten valentijnschol...@hotmail.com wrote: I opened a new bug report: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=638896 thanks valentijn. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe.

Bug#638896: clarification

After making some backups, I tried to upgrade the kernel again. Guess what? It just works now. arghhh! valentijn, that's *exactly* the mistake that i made :) actually in my case, i installed grub (and lvm2) which triggered off the postinst initramfs-tools hook. you cannot back-recover

Bug#638896: Fw: linux-image-2.6.39-bpo.2-amd64 root filesystem not found on boot

On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 10:02 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton luke.leigh...@gmail.com wrote: From: Valentijn Scholten Sent: Monday, August 22, 2011 10:45 PM To: 638...@bugs.debian.org Subject: Re: linux-image-2.6.39-bpo.2-amd64 root filesystem not found on boot Luke, The installer has

Bug#636123: linux-image-2.6.39 not booting due to older package (not in list of dependencies!)

On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 2:05 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton luke.leigh...@gmail.com wrote: now, i've discussed this on the bugtracker and there clearly isn't - and really shouldn't be - a listed debian dependency between linux-image-2.6.39 kernel and a userspace library.  however

Bug#636123: linux-image-2.6.39 not booting due to older package (not in list of dependencies!)

On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 9:14 PM, Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com wrote: (culling the cc list) Hi Luke, allo jonathan. appreciate that you took time on this one, very much. i started writing a comprehensive reply, but then decided i was spending my time on an issue where there's no

Bug#636290: linux-image-2.6.32-5-amd64: serious ext4 filesystem corruption even after fsck

On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk wrote: On Tue, 2011-08-02 at 03:51 +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 1:54 AM, Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk wrote: On Tue, 2011-08-02 at 01:29 +0100, lkcl wrote: Package: linux-2.6

Bug#636123: closed by Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk (Re: Bug#636123: fixed the problem: broken/missing dependency)

Subject: Re: Bug#636123: fixed the problem: broken/missing dependency On Tue, 2011-08-02 at 05:51 +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 12:44 AM, Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk wrote: On Sun, 2011-07-31 at 14:37 +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: ok - i've

Bug#636123: linux-image-2.6.39 not booting due to older package (not in list of dependencies!)

http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=636123 there's a rather complex set of interdependencies between linux-image-2.6.39, libdevmapper, initramfs-tools and LVM that has resulted in a system which last had 2.6.32-trunk-amd64 installed (and associated packages) failing to boot when the

Bug#636123: closed by Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk (Re: Bug#636123: fixed the problem: broken/missing dependency)

On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 4:03 PM, Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk wrote: Luke, you will get no help from me so long as you insult me and refuse to help me to fix the problem. ... and closing the bugreport whilst i'm in the middle of investigating isn't insulting? if i didn't feel insulted by

Bug#636290: linux-image-2.6.32-5-amd64: serious ext4 filesystem corruption even after fsck

On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 1:54 AM, Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk wrote: On Tue, 2011-08-02 at 01:29 +0100, lkcl wrote: Package: linux-2.6 Version: 2.6.32-5 Not an actual version number. Severity: important running 2.6.32-5-amd64, after running fsck on a corrupted ext4 filesystem which

Bug#636123: fixed the problem: broken/missing dependency

ok - i've established the cause of the failure: incorrect dependencies in linux-image-2.6.39-2-amd64. the most likely candidate which is the broken/missing dependency i am guessing isn't grub or lvm2, but probably libdevmapper. but - looking in /var/lib/dpkg/info with ls -altr shows the list of

Bug#510191: linux-image-2.6.26-1-686: madwifi compiles and works perfectly on 2.6.18 but same source fails on 2.6.26

On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 6:36 PM, lkcl l...@lkcl.net wrote: Package: linux-image-2.6.26-1-686 Version: 2.6.26-12 Severity: important madwifi source code hasn't changed in 18 months: works perfectly under 2.6.18-4-686, sets up wifi0 etc. etc. and yet exactly the same source fails miserably

Bug#319823: closed by Bastian Blank [EMAIL PROTECTED] (disagrees with d-i)

, Journey to Babel, stardate 3842.4 -- Forwarded message -- From: Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Debian Bug Tracking System [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 02:30:41 +0100 Subject: kernel-image-2.6-686: 2.6 debian kernels do not install on m/cs

Bug#409222: linux-image-2.6.18-3-686: on system with absolutely no SATA drives - 'ata1: port is slow to respond, please be patient'

On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 10:03:19AM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 08:05:29AM +0100, Frans Pop wrote: On Thursday 01 February 2007 03:18, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: unfortunately there is no change. this is with 2.6.18-6-686. ghfield

Bug#409222: linux-image-2.6.18-3-686: on system with absolutely no SATA drives - 'ata1: port is slow to respond, please be patient'

, 2007 at 05:28:00PM +0100, maximilian attems wrote: On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 10:03:19AM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 08:05:29AM +0100, Frans Pop wrote: On Thursday 01 February 2007 03:18, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: unfortunately

Bug#409222: linux-image-2.6.18-3-686: on system with absolutely no SATA drives - 'ata1: port is slow to respond, please be patient'

On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 08:05:29AM +0100, Frans Pop wrote: On Thursday 01 February 2007 03:18, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: unfortunately there is no change. this is with 2.6.18-6-686. ghfield:~# apt-cache show linux-image-2.6.18-3-686 Version: 2.6.18-7 This is _not_

Bug#409222: linux-image-2.6.18-3-686: on system with absolutely no SATA drives - 'ata1: port is slow to respond, please be patient'

Package: linux-image-2.6.18-3-686 Severity: normal adds nearly two minutes to the boot time as the timeouts on both ata1 and ata2 are nearly 50 seconds - 30 seconds waiting time each plus several 5 second retries. l. -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable Architecture: i386

Bug#409222: linux-image-2.6.18-3-686: on system with absolutely no SATA drives - 'ata1: port is slow to respond, please be patient'

On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 02:02:54AM +0100, Norbert Tretkowski wrote: tags 409222 +moreinfo thanks * Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: adds nearly two minutes to the boot time as the timeouts on both ata1 and ata2 are nearly 50 seconds - 30 seconds waiting time each plus several 5

Bug#338543: acknowledged by developer (Bug#338543: fixed in linux-2.6 2.6.14-3)

thank you! On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 11:33:30AM -0800, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: This is an automatic notification regarding your Bug report #338543: linux-image-2.6.14-1-686: CONFIG_SECURITY_NETWORK is disabled which totally breaks SE/Linux, which was filed against the

Bug#338543: linux-image-2.6.14-1-686: CONFIG_SECURITY_NETWORK is disabled which totally breaks SE/Linux

Package: linux-image-2.6.14-1-686 Severity: normal On Thu, Nov 10, 2005 at 01:50:24PM -0500, Stephen Smalley wrote: On Wed, 2005-11-09 at 08:36 -0500, Stephen Smalley wrote: On Tue, 2005-11-08 at 20:31 +0100, Erich Schubert wrote: Hi, Hmmm...can you supply any more info to help

Bug#319878: kernel-image-2.6-686: the entire range of 2.6 deb ian kernels do not install on m/cs with = 48mb RAM

On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 10:06:15PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: when i get a chance, which will likely be sunday, i will install a 2.6 kernel on my P1XX machine, then remove 16mb from it (i found someone who had an old machine...) So, you really have no idea of what is going wrong ?

Bug#319878: kernel-image-2.6-686: the entire range of 2.6 deb ian kernels do not install on m/cs with = 48mb RAM

On Mon, Aug 08, 2005 at 02:28:12PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 11:25:18PM +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 11:56:21AM -0300, Humberto Massa Guimar?es wrote: ** Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton :: possible solutions: * fix

Bug#319878: kernel-image-2.6-686: the entire range of 2.6 debian kernels do not install on m/cs with = 48mb RAM

Package: kernel-image-2.6-686 Version: 2.6.5-2 Severity: normal not one single one of the 2.6 kernels - 2.6.5, 2.6.6, 2.6.7, 2.6.8, 2.6.9, 2.6.10, 2.6.11 nor 2.6.12 - can be installed on a system with less than 48mb of RAM - because of the hungry memory requirements of the initial ram disk.

Bug#319878: kernel-image-2.6-686: the entire range of 2.6 debian kernels do not install on m/cs with = 48mb RAM

: On Mon, 25 Jul 2005, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: telling people to roll their own kernel (mr horms) isn't an acceptable option, either. i may be able to do that (mr horms) but other people won't be able to. you going (mr horms) to tell me and people like me that i should throw away

Re: Bug#319878: kernel-image-2.6-686: the entire range of 2.6 deb ian kernels do not install on m/cs with = 48mb RAM

On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 11:56:21AM -0300, Humberto Massa Guimar?es wrote: ** Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton :: telling people to roll their own kernel (mr horms) isn't an acceptable option, either. i may be able to do that (mr horms) but other people won't be able to. you going (mr

Bug#319878: kernel-image-2.6-686: the entire range of 2.6 debian kernels do not install on m/cs with = 48mb RAM

On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 03:51:22PM -0700, Matt Taggart wrote: It would probably be a good idea to record what ought to work in any given release and maybe have an ongoing idea what it should be. The answer might be architecture specific? ISTR either the d-i team or apt/dpkg/aptitude trying

Bug#319823: Bug#319878: kernel-image-2.6-686: the entire range of 2.6 debian kernels do not install on m/cs with = 48mb RAM

On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 12:03:48PM -0700, Matt Taggart wrote: Luke, Sorry for the previous terse replies to your bug reports #319878 and #319823. The debian-kernel team gets a lot of email/bugs and sometimes is quick to response/close bugs without a lot of explanation. *sigh* yeh i know.

Bug#319823: kernel-image-2.6-686: 2.6 debian kernels do not install on m/cs with = 48mb RAM!!!

Package: kernel-image-2.6-686 Version: 2.6.5-2 Severity: normal any system with 48mb of ram or less results in a kernel panic due to a lack of memory, at boot time. 2.6 kernels use more memory, more resources... and now this. welcome to bloatware, roll-on windows 3.1. urk!! -- System

Bug#319429: linux-image-2.6.12-1-686: installation, when used with grub and a separate /boot partition results in boot failure

Package: linux-image-2.6.12-1-686 Severity: normal setup: - grub not lilo - /boot separate partition - mbr - grub in /dev/hda1 (/boot) install linux-image-2.6.12-1-686: reboot, whammo. NOTHING boots. i get grub error messages about must load linux kernel before initrd. on BOTH THE OLD AND

Bug#312871: initrd-tools: please provide support for udev _and_ selinux

Package: initrd-tools Version: 0.1.77 Severity: wishlist just like is done in FC2 and above's initrd, please could you consider putting uclib'd udev into the initrd, and then making sure that the programs in it are selinux-enabled / aware? i had to make a pig's ear of debian/selinux when udev

Bug#312714: initrd-tools: swsuspend requires an extra line in order to avoid filesystem corruption

Package: initrd-tools Version: 0.1.77 Severity: normal according to http://www.suspend2.net/HOWTO-2.html you need this: echo /proc/software_suspend/do_resume BEFORE the script mounts your filesystem. If the line is missing, your system will not resume. If the line comes

Bug#312714: acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#312714: initrd-tools: swsuspend requires an extra line in order to avoid filesystem corruption)

-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Level: On Thu, 09 Jun 2005, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: according to http://www.suspend2.net/HOWTO-2.html that's a strange piece of junk. use it on your own risk. you need this: echo /proc/software_suspend/do_resume BEFORE the script mounts

Bug#298334: kernel-image-2.6.10-1-686: volume being listed as an input not an output for CS4299 rev6 (I440MX)

Package: kernel-image-2.6.10-1-686 Version: 2.6.10-4 Severity: normal like the usb-audio device i have (a PDT cyberphone with mono capabilities), my Intel I440MX Cirrus Logic CS4299 (rev 6) has started being reported with volume as an INPUT device not an OUTPUT. the I440MX was not until about

Bug#294982: kernel-image-2.6.10-1-686: usb audio device stopped working since about 2.6.8

Package: kernel-image-2.6.10-1-686 Version: 2.6.10-4 Severity: normal i have a USB handset and it used to work in about 2.6.8. USB HID v1.00 Device [Promotion and Display Technology Ltd USB VoIP Cyberphone Handse] on usb-:00:07.2-1 2.6.10 the microphone works (wavrecord) but playback does

Bug#288263: initrd-tools: capability module missing from /etc/mkinitrd/modules

Package: initrd-tools Version: 0.1.65 Severity: normal 2.6.9 and above now have capability as a module. if this module is not loaded, udev will not operate properly. selinux also is now a module and it too should probably be loaded, otherwise if /sbin/init runs and finds that selinux isn't

Bug#274860: kernel-image-2.6.8-1-686: CDROM_SEND_PACKET ioctls only work as root

Package: kernel-image-2.6.8-1-686 Severity: normal i have upgraded to 2.6.8-1-686 and i find that k3b no longer runs as an ordinary user - even though it used to work fine on 2.6.7. an strace of root running k3b and a comparative strace of an ordinary user shows that an attempt to perform an

Bug#274860: Acknowledgement (kernel-image-2.6.8-1-686: CDROM_SEND_PACKET ioctls only work as root)

additional info: kernel 2.6.8. ioctl (/dev/hdc, CDROM_SEND_PACKET, cmd) commands that are failing as non-root, even when permission is granted rwxrwxrwx to /dev/hdc, are, according to some debug info added to k3b: GET CONFIGURATION (46) error code: 0 sense key: NO SENSE

Bug#274860: Acknowledgement (kernel-image-2.6.8-1-686: CDROM_SEND_PACKET ioctls only work as root)

the problem...] l. On Mon, Oct 04, 2004 at 02:10:14PM +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: additional info: kernel 2.6.8. ioctl (/dev/hdc, CDROM_SEND_PACKET, cmd) commands that are failing as non-root, even when permission is granted rwxrwxrwx to /dev/hdc, are, according to some debug info

Bug#249510: acknowledged by developer (selinux in debian kernel)

it's not a severe performance penalty. especially when it's disabled by default with selinux=0. On Wed, Sep 29, 2004 at 08:33:08AM -0700, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: This is an automatic notification regarding your Bug report #249510: kernel-image-2.6.5-1-686: can SELinux please be

Bug#270850: acknowledged by developer (iptables patch)

well... sort-of! please submit your patch upstream at the netfilter team, debian mostly uses vanilla linus sources. there devel list is at [EMAIL PROTECTED] i assume you know http://www.netfilter.org/ . ;) -- maks kernel janitorhttp://janitor.kernelnewbies.org/ -- -- Truth,

Bug#249510: acknowledged by developer (selinux in debian kernel)

On Wed, Sep 29, 2004 at 10:33:28PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: On Wed, Sep 29, 2004 at 09:14:20PM +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: it's not a severe performance penalty. especially when it's disabled by default with selinux=0. Yes, all the indirect calls due

Bug#249510: acknowledged by developer (selinux in debian kernel)

On Wed, Sep 29, 2004 at 11:47:20PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: On Wed, Sep 29, 2004 at 10:54:21PM +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: On Wed, Sep 29, 2004 at 10:33:28PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: On Wed, Sep 29, 2004 at 09:14:20PM +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote

Bug#273055: kernel-image-2.6.8-1-686: user-driven unmount -l /media/usbdisk causes ioctl(/dev/sdc, BLKRRPART) to fail

Package: kernel-image-2.6.8-1-686 Severity: normal hi herbert, this is quite a serious bug - a user-driven action can cause kernel-level hotplug events to not be generated. details are here: http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0409.2/1370.html repro instructions are: 1)