On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 10:28:44PM -0600, Jordan Bettis wrote:
Hi. I just wanted to weigh in and say that I've tried Max's fix on my
Ultra 5 and I can confirm that it works with the X server from lenny.
Before trying Max's kernel patch I also verified that X.org is
*broken* and unusable
reassign 500358 xserver-xorg-core
thanks
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 11:07:06PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 22:10:03 +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
I fail to see the _kernel_ bug it fixes. I now know that this change
triggers a bug in the old (considered broken by
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
reassign 500358 xserver-xorg-core
Bug#500358: mach64 stopped working on the Sun Ultra 5 graphics card after
upgrade
Bug#488669: kernel changes break X on sparc64/pci
Bug reassigned from package `linux-2.6' to `xserver-xorg-core'.
thanks
Stopping
On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 11:17:16PM +0100, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
Please retest the official 2.6.26-11 images to verify if they work you:
Irrelevant question as this was no bug fix but a workaround.
Bastian
--
Emotions are alien to me. I'm a scientist.
-- Spock, This Side
Hi. I just wanted to weigh in and say that I've tried Max's fix on my
Ultra 5 and I can confirm that it works with the X server from lenny.
Before trying Max's kernel patch I also verified that X.org is
*broken* and unusable using the default kernel. This is true of the
X.org server included in
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 11:46:24AM +0300, Max Dmitrichenko wrote:
It is the decision of the maintainer if nothing else matches.
Ok. Who is the maintainer?
debian-kernel, represented by whom doing the work.
Go on and read the discussion of this bug if you really interested why
these patches
2008/11/11, Bastian Blank [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Go on and read the discussion of this bug if you really interested why
these patches differ.
You want something from us. Also the bugreport reads itself as two
different bugs, which does not make it easier to understand.
Bastian, what should I do?
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 18:22:57 +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
The first patch is fine. The revert is not.
Even if the revert is the only way to get X to work on those machines in
lenny?
Cheers,
Julien
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble?
On Sun, Nov 09, 2008 at 10:30:38PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
SPARC is a traditionally brand
architecture. This case
affects Ultra 5 and may be several other workstation. So if something
doesn't function
on one box it doesn't function on a whole generation
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 08:20:01PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 18:22:57 +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
The first patch is fine. The revert is not.
Even if the revert is the only way to get X to work on those machines in
lenny?
I fail to see the _kernel_ bug it fixes. I
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 22:10:03 +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 08:20:01PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 18:22:57 +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
The first patch is fine. The revert is not.
Even if the revert is the only way to get X to work on
It is the decision of the maintainer if nothing else matches.
Ok. Who is the maintainer?
NMUing a properly maintained package without action from the CTTE is
also a no-go.
Sorry, I'm not a DD and I'm very bad in your politics and burocracy.
2008/11/9 Bastian Blank [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
OK, since there was no opposition and there is still no explaination on
why this bug was donwgraded in the first place I'm upgrading it back to the
initial severity.
There is only a small fraction of machines affected, so this is not RC.
This is not
On Sun, Nov 09, 2008 at 09:37:11PM +0300, Max Dmitrichenko wrote:
2008/11/9 Bastian Blank [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
OK, since there was no opposition and there is still no explaination on
why this bug was donwgraded in the first place I'm upgrading it back to the
initial severity.
There is
severity 500358 grave
Thanks
On Thu, Nov 06, 2008 at 06:24:57PM +0100, Gaudenz Steinlin wrote:
As this affects a major part of all SPARC machines, I really think this is
release
critical and the bug severity should be upgraded again. If you don't disagree
strongly
I will upgrade it in the
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
severity 500358 important
Bug#500358: mach64 stopped working on the Sun Ultra 5 graphics card after
upgrade
Bug#488669: kernel changes break X on sparc64/pci
Severity set to `important' from `grave'
thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me
severity 500358 important
thanks
On Sat, Nov 08, 2008 at 11:54:38PM +0100, Gaudenz Steinlin wrote:
On Thu, Nov 06, 2008 at 06:24:57PM +0100, Gaudenz Steinlin wrote:
As this affects a major part of all SPARC machines, I really think this is
release
critical and the bug severity should be
17 matches
Mail list logo
