On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 10:28:57 -0500
Anthony DeRobertis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
I believe it is important for yaird to apply same strict logic to
all Linux kernels, official or not.
Seems perfectly reasonable to me.
Thanks.
I think the following has been
Version: 0.0.12-5
On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 13:51:22 +0100
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Notice that on wednesday, this bug will be open since 3 month, if i
am not wrong,
Ah - for some reason my bug-closing hint in changelog was ignored. How
very annoying...
- Jonas
--
* Jonas
On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 11:58:58AM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
Version: 0.0.12-5
On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 13:51:22 +0100
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Notice that on wednesday, this bug will be open since 3 month, if i
am not wrong,
Ah - for some reason my bug-closing hint in
Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
Do you consider the following a reasonable resolution?:
Sounds fine to me. Though it looks like your changelog entry has been
mangled a little:
bug#345067 (thanks especially to Jurij Smakov [EMAIL PROTECTED]
bug#for
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 12:07:14 -0500
Anthony DeRobertis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
Do you consider the following a reasonable resolution?:
Sounds fine to me.
Great. :-)
Though it looks like your changelog entry has been mangled a little:
bug#345067 (thanks
On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 11:58:58AM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
Version: 0.0.12-5
On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 13:51:22 +0100
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Notice that on wednesday, this bug will be open since 3 month, if i
am not wrong,
Ah - for some reason my bug-closing hint in
On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 19:55:48 +0100
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 11:58:58AM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
Version: 0.0.12-5
On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 13:51:22 +0100
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Notice that on wednesday, this bug will be open since
On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 09:09:45PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 19:55:48 +0100
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 11:58:58AM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
Version: 0.0.12-5
On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 13:51:22 +0100
Sven Luther [EMAIL
For info, ...
It seems that i am to get blamed for everything that went badly after all, and
it is perfectly normal for jonas not to aknowledge the effort i put into
solving this issue, while he was just ignoring it and putting out random crazy
theories for not acting.
I am disgusted with how
On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 08:28:12 +0100
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
jonas believes it is more important to not break whatever the user
may do, rather than have good support for official kernels,
No, I believe those use cases are equally important.
I believe it is important for yaird to
On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 13:13:42 +0100
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, basically, you applied a workaround patch without caution and
without understanding fully the issue, while strongly refused when i
did the same, and furthermore in a much less intrusive way.
Thank you
On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 01:34:11PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 13:13:42 +0100
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, basically, you applied a workaround patch without caution and
without understanding fully the issue, while strongly refused when i
did the same,
Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
I believe it is important for yaird to apply same strict logic to all
Linux kernels, official or not.
Seems perfectly reasonable to me.
I think the following has been discovered:
1. The ide-generic requirement was added by the modular IDE patch, which
Debian included
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 09:48:11AM -0500, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
Sven Luther wrote:
That means that jonas's fear of breaking self-built kernels is vastly
unfunded, and that he should remove those hacks, include a mention of
the broken kernels in the README file, and maybe propose a
On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 19:52:42 -0800 (PST)
Jurij Smakov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 10 Mar 2006, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
If modular-ide is the sole source of trouble here, then what worked
in 2.6.14-4 and earlier?
The bugreports seem to indicate that things broke in 2.6.14-5 that
On Thu, 9 Mar 2006, Steve Langasek wrote:
What version of the kernel was this analysis done with? The workaround in
yaird is explicitly commented as existing for the benefit of older kernel
versions; can you assure us that this aspect of the driver design is
unchanged from 2.6.8 through
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 12:00:50AM -0800, Jurij Smakov wrote:
When ide-generic is included (it is loaded after all the native ide
modules), the kernel boots fine. The reason is that in the Debian
2.6.8 sources the ide-generic initialization procedure contains the
call to ide_scan_pcibus(),
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 09:12:42AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 12:00:50AM -0800, Jurij Smakov wrote:
When ide-generic is included (it is loaded after all the native ide
modules), the kernel boots fine. The reason is that in the Debian
2.6.8 sources the ide-generic
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 08:10:12AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
I've done a little poking of my own at sysfs based on the comments in
the yaird code. I can confirm that it is possible for a PCI IDE driver
to be listed as associated with a PCI device without actually being the
driver used to
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 12:40:26AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 08:10:12AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
I've done a little poking of my own at sysfs based on the comments in
the yaird code. I can confirm that it is possible for a PCI IDE driver
to be listed as
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 09:49:18AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
Mmm. When this was happening, could you use and mount partition on this
device ?
And when doing so, do you know which of ide-generic or cmd64x would be
used to
read the drive ?
Are you suggesting that loading cmd64x
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 01:10:27AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 09:49:18AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
Mmm. When this was happening, could you use and mount partition on this
device ?
And when doing so, do you know which of ide-generic or cmd64x would be
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
(Looks like the two days rest is getting irrelevant...)
On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 00:00:50 -0800 (PST)
Jurij Smakov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 9 Mar 2006, Steve Langasek wrote:
What version of the kernel was this analysis done with? The
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 12:28:07PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
That patch has been dropped starting with the release of 2.6.15-1
Debian kernel packages, according to changelog.
Yes. It is also noted as being dropped in 2.6.14-6.
The first of my collected[1] Bugreports[2] indicated
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 13:53:18 +0100
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 12:28:07PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
That patch has been dropped starting with the release of 2.6.15-1
Debian kernel packages, according to
Sven Luther wrote:
That means that jonas's fear of breaking self-built kernels is vastly
unfunded, and that he should remove those hacks, include a mention of
the broken kernels in the README file, and maybe propose a fixed yaird
to stable-proposed-updates or something.
yaird is not in
Jurij Smakov wrote:
That patch has been dropped starting with the release of 2.6.15-1
Debian kernel packages, according to changelog.
I tested my 2.6.12 machine last night, and it does indeed require
ide-generic. My empirical results agree with your analysis.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On Friday 10 March 2006 15:29, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
If modular-ide is the sole source of trouble here, then what worked in
2.6.14-4 and earlier?
=2.6.12 used initrd-tools and that must still contain the correct magic
to deal with this.
2.6.14 was the first kernel tested with yaird and
On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 17:07:34 +0100
Frans Pop [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Friday 10 March 2006 15:29, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
If modular-ide is the sole source of trouble here, then what worked
in 2.6.14-4 and earlier?
=2.6.12 used initrd-tools and that must still contain the correct
On Fri, 10 Mar 2006, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
If modular-ide is the sole source of trouble here, then what worked in
2.6.14-4 and earlier?
The bugreports seem to indicate that things broke in 2.6.14-5 that
worked in 2.6.14-4. And it seems nothing related else than linux-2.6
changed then - not
On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 01:35:23AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 10:35:38PM -0800, Jurij Smakov wrote:
On Thu, 9 Mar 2006, Sven Luther wrote:
As quoted from http://wiki.debian.org/LinuxKernelIdeProblem, it is no clear
that ide-generic and via82cxxx to take only one
On Thu, 9 Mar 2006 11:43:03 +0100
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 11:30:47AM +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
On Thursday 09 March 2006 07:35, Jurij Smakov wrote:
Looking at
the code I cannot see how the native drivers can depend in any
way on the ide-generic being
On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 08:08:04PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 11:08:33AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
Steve, what is the interest of doing this ? We only have 2.6.15 currently in
sid/etch, and sarge uses 2.6.8 together with initrd-tool, so it is a
non-issue.
33 matches
Mail list logo
