Hello,
the kernel-headers for the linux-headers-2.6.16-rc6-686 package
(installed from http://kernel-archive.buildserver.net/debian-kernel )
seem to be built on the wrong architecture. The module building script
are not executable, see below:
Hello,
see subject, another critical bug in linux-headers-2.6.16-rc6-686.
Eduard.
--
Na'Toth #2: Ambassador, it is not my place to speculate on how anything gets
into your bed.
-- Quotes from Babylon 5 --
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 07:51:49AM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
the kernel-headers for the linux-headers-2.6.16-rc6-686 package
(installed from http://kernel-archive.buildserver.net/debian-kernel )
seem to be built on the wrong architecture. The module building script
are not executable, see
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
* Bastian Blank [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-03-14 10:08]:
Yes, the packages are cross compiled on a powerpc machine as there are
no fast enough i386 machines available. Seems that I have to find a way
to fix that.
BTW, I can confirm this problem. I've been building test kernels for
mips and arm
Package: initramfs-tools
Version: 0.53c
Severity: serious
Hi,
when udev gets upgraded, the latest initram is regenerated via udev's
postinst. If using lilo, the system becomes then unbootable due to
lilo needing to get rerun in order to ack the changed initrd. See the
irc snippet
Hi all,
On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 07:51:49AM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
the kernel-headers for the linux-headers-2.6.16-rc6-686 package
(installed from http://kernel-archive.buildserver.net/debian-kernel )
seem to be built on the wrong architecture. The module building script
are not
Just to let you know, the bug persists in 2.6.15.
--
.''`. martin f. krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: :' :proud Debian developer and author: http://debiansystem.info
`. `'`
`- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system
Invalid/expired PGP (sub)keys? Use
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
Adeodato Simó wrote:
when udev gets upgraded, the latest initram is regenerated via
udev's postinst.
This sounds to me to be a fundamentally bad idea. The current initrd
clearly works --- the system did, after all, boot --- why would you
want to regenerate it?
If there is some *really*
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
reassign 356868 initramfs-tools
Bug#356868: does not work with busybox-cvs-static
Bug reassigned from package `udev' to `initramfs-tools'.
thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system
reassign 356868 initramfs-tools
thanks
On Mar 14, martin f krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
initramfs-tools is happy with busybox-cvs-static. However, this does
not work, as ide.agent's way to determine the /proc/ide/* directory
with printf doesn't work with busybox-cvs-static (hd141 instead
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
also sprach Marco d'Itri [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.03.14.1833 +0100]:
What what about initramfs-tools adding the conflict?
Why? It does nicely with busybox-cvs-static. udev can't deal with
it.
Changing ide.agent is not an option, it has been hell to find
something which works in
On Mar 14, martin f krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What what about initramfs-tools adding the conflict?
Why? It does nicely with busybox-cvs-static. udev can't deal with
it.
busybox-cvs-static providing a broken shell could be a good reason.
19:39 madduck Md: ide.agent is incompatible
also sprach Marco d'Itri [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.03.14.2021 +0100]:
Why? It does nicely with busybox-cvs-static. udev can't deal with
it.
busybox-cvs-static providing a broken shell could be a good reason.
How is the shell broken?
Or maybe this should just be reassigned to
On Mar 14, martin f krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
also sprach Marco d'Itri [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.03.14.2021 +0100]:
Why? It does nicely with busybox-cvs-static. udev can't deal with
it.
busybox-cvs-static providing a broken shell could be a good reason.
How is the shell broken?
You
[responding to the bug rather than only the d-kernel list]
On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 12:29:19 -0500
Anthony DeRobertis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Adeodato Simó wrote:
when udev gets upgraded, the latest initram is regenerated via
udev's postinst.
This sounds to me to be a fundamentally bad
also sprach Marco d'Itri [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.03.14.2030 +0100]:
And if something breaks a script which works with bash, dash and a
modern busybox then it fits pretty well my definiton of brokeness.
the code in ide.agent is one massive hack. it's not posix afaict.
thus, no shell is broken if
On Mar 14, martin f krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
also sprach Marco d'Itri [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.03.14.2030 +0100]:
And if something breaks a script which works with bash, dash and a
modern busybox then it fits pretty well my definiton of brokeness.
the code in ide.agent is one massive
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
Package: linux-image-2.6.16-rc5-powerpc
Version: 2.6.15+2.6.16-rc5-0experimental.1
Severity: normal
Hi,
I was trying 2.6.16-rc5 and I got this error while trying to modprobe
snd-powermac on powerbook6,2
Unable to handle kernel paging request for data at address 0x0002
Faulting instruction
Hi,
as we're now on track in getting sarge r2 out, I'm interessted when the
next kernel update should happen - and of course if there is something
important from your side. As far as I understood, that update will be an
ABI-change, which means: we need to rebuild the installer. Is that
correct?
Package: linux-image-2.6.15-1-686
Version: 2.6.15-8
Severity: normal
Hello,
I can't use the power off button of my laptop to start the power off
sequence. I recompiled a vanilla kernel linux-2.6.15.6 (from kernel.org)
and the button works (without changing anything in user space) so the
bug
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
Accepted:
kernel-image-2.6-386_2.6.15+2.6.16-rc5-0experimental.1_i386.deb
to
pool/main/l/linux-2.6/kernel-image-2.6-386_2.6.15+2.6.16-rc5-0experimental.1_i386.deb
kernel-image-2.6-686-smp_2.6.15+2.6.16-rc5-0experimental.1_i386.deb
to
Accepted:
kernel-image-2.6-s390_2.6.15+2.6.16-rc5-0experimental.1_s390.deb
to
pool/main/l/linux-2.6/kernel-image-2.6-s390_2.6.15+2.6.16-rc5-0experimental.1_s390.deb
kernel-image-2.6-s390x_2.6.15+2.6.16-rc5-0experimental.1_s390.deb
to
Andreas Barth wrote:
as we're now on track in getting sarge r2 out, I'm interessted when the
next kernel update should happen - and of course if there is something
important from your side. As far as I understood, that update will be an
ABI-change, which means: we need to rebuild the
On Wednesday 15 March 2006 00:15, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
The update is built and tested, it'll appear soon. It contains three
ABI changing security fixes, so the ABI will be bumped. I can't speak
for d-i.
ABI changes are for both 2.6 and 2.4 kernel, correct? Or is the ABI change
only for
On Tue, 2006-03-14 at 21:46 +0100, Andreas Barth wrote:
Hi,
as we're now on track in getting sarge r2 out, I'm interessted when the
next kernel update should happen - and of course if there is something
important from your side. As far as I understood, that update will be an
ABI-change,
Hi,
I am going through the expulsion process to have Sven Luther removed
from the project. The process is outlined here:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2005/08/msg5.html,
and I have already completed step 1.
Step #2 requires the support of some 15 developers. I am attempting
On Tue, 2006-03-14 at 21:01 -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
[...]
Sven has always been a nuisance to deal w/, but up until now I have not
considered this action. In the past two weeks, the following comments
made by him have changed my mind:
2006-03-07:
svenl jonas: i hope we never again meet
Frans Pop wrote:
On Wednesday 15 March 2006 00:15, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
The update is built and tested, it'll appear soon. It contains three
ABI changing security fixes, so the ABI will be bumped. I can't speak
for d-i.
ABI changes are for both 2.6 and 2.4 kernel, correct? Or is the
On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 09:01:09PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
Hi,
I am going through the expulsion process to have Sven Luther removed
from the project. The process is outlined here:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2005/08/msg5.html,
and I have already completed step 1.
38 matches
Mail list logo
