On 6 Jul 2003, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Sun, 2003-07-06 at 16:39, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > On Sun, 6 Jul 2003, Michael Scherer wrote: > > > and the winner is .... > > > minilogd. > > > > Well why do you think Andrey's patch i resent was called devfs.minilogd ? > > I think the problem is really in the kernel, but nobody wants to try:( > > probably because it's a bit of a pain to apply the patch and recompile > the kernel...is there no easier way of testing? Ah...but I still suspect you are all being lazy.
It is not that much work to compile a minimal kernel with this patch. It is a timing issue, every change in rc.sysinit can trigger it. And reverting to an old minilogd is not a real solution. Well..If you all stay being lazy I might build a kernel rpm with the patch. I thought this list was for cookers.... d. (now you will all kill me if the patch doesn't fix it *grin*) O..perhaps another way to be sure is to produce a stack trace with alt-sysrq-T. But ofcourse that doesn't fix it. >
