Re: [uml-devel] 2.6.18 UML machine on FC6 host

2007-05-23 Thread Andrew Sinclair
@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [uml-devel] 2.6.18 UML machine on FC6 host -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Ryan Angilly wrote: > Do you know why exactly the kernel needs to be upgraded? Just curious. Some bugs that were fixed in the host code. circa 2.6.20.2 > > Antoi

Re: [uml-devel] 2.6.18 UML machine on FC6 host

2007-05-22 Thread Antoine Martin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Ryan Angilly wrote: > Do you know why exactly the kernel needs to be upgraded? Just curious. Some bugs that were fixed in the host code. circa 2.6.20.2 > > Antoine Martin nagafix.co.uk> writes: >>> I've been trying to run UML on FC6 (kernel 2.6.2

Re: [uml-devel] 2.6.18 UML machine on FC6 host

2007-05-22 Thread Ryan Angilly
Do you know why exactly the kernel needs to be upgraded? Just curious. Antoine Martin nagafix.co.uk> writes: > > I've been trying to run UML on FC6 (kernel 2.6.20-1.2933.fc6) and appear > > to have encountered the same issue as described in the following > > threads: > You need to upgrade your h

Re: [uml-devel] 2.6.18 UML machine on FC6 host

2007-05-18 Thread Antoine Martin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Andrew Sinclair wrote: > Hi there, > > I've been trying to run UML on FC6 (kernel 2.6.20-1.2933.fc6) and appear > to have encountered the same issue as described in the following > threads: You need to upgrade your host kernel. Try 2.6.21 or >= 2.6.

Re: [uml-devel] 2.6.18 UML machine on FC6 host

2007-05-18 Thread Andrew Sinclair
Hi there, I've been trying to run UML on FC6 (kernel 2.6.20-1.2933.fc6) and appear to have encountered the same issue as described in the following threads: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ msg04571.html http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/m sg04

Re: [uml-devel] 2.6.18 UML machine on FC6 host

2007-03-20 Thread Jacques-Charles Lafoucriere
Jeff Dike wrote: On Tue, Mar 20, 2007 at 09:12:44AM +0100, Jacques-Charles Lafoucriere wrote: I applied the patch to a 2.6.20 kernel and tried the 2.6.21-rc4 and still have the issue The UML machine is in an infinite loop Do I have to change things on my host machine ? (I use 2.6.18-1.27

Re: [uml-devel] 2.6.18 UML machine on FC6 host

2007-03-20 Thread Jeff Dike
On Tue, Mar 20, 2007 at 09:12:44AM +0100, Jacques-Charles Lafoucriere wrote: > I applied the patch to a 2.6.20 kernel and tried the 2.6.21-rc4 and > still have the issue > > The UML machine is in an infinite loop > > Do I have to change things on my host machine ? (I use 2.6.18-1.2798 > with no

Re: [uml-devel] 2.6.18 UML machine on FC6 host

2007-03-20 Thread Jacques-Charles Lafoucriere
Hi, I applied the patch to a 2.6.20 kernel and tried the 2.6.21-rc4 and still have the issue The UML machine is in an infinite loop ptrace(PTRACE_GETREGS, 16641, 0, 0x9dc5974) = 0 ptrace(PTRACE_GETFPXREGS, 16641, 0, 0x9dc5a24) = 0 ptrace(PTRACE_CONT, 16641, 0, SIGSEGV) = 0 waitpid(16641, [{W

Re: [uml-devel] 2.6.18 UML machine on FC6 host

2007-03-19 Thread Jacques-Charles Lafoucriere
Jeff Dike wrote: On Mon, Mar 19, 2007 at 10:00:49AM +0100, Jacques-Charles Lafoucriere wrote: I am trying to build and run a UML 2.6.18 machine on a FC6 host. (2.6.18-1.2798) Why are you insisting on a 2.6.18 UML? I work on some kernel product that will be available on RHEL5 whic

Re: [uml-devel] 2.6.18 UML machine on FC6 host

2007-03-19 Thread Jeff Dike
On Mon, Mar 19, 2007 at 10:00:49AM +0100, Jacques-Charles Lafoucriere wrote: > I am trying to build and run a UML 2.6.18 machine on a FC6 host. > (2.6.18-1.2798) Why are you insisting on a 2.6.18 UML? > I have tried many patches from the list and was not able to be successful > (hang after VFS:

[uml-devel] 2.6.18 UML machine on FC6 host

2007-03-19 Thread Jacques-Charles Lafoucriere
Hi, I am trying to build and run a UML 2.6.18 machine on a FC6 host. (2.6.18-1.2798) I have tried many patches from the list and was not able to be successful (hang after VFS: Mounted root (ext3 filesystem) readonly.) Does the host need a special patch to run recent UML kernel or is it only an i