Your message dated Thu, 25 Feb 2010 23:44:51 +0100
with message-id <20100225224451.ga13...@galadriel.inutil.org>
and subject line Re: base: Couldn't get CPU usage for each process
has caused the Debian Bug report #517108,
regarding base: Couldn't get CPU usage for each process
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
517108: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=517108
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: base
Severity: normal
I couldn't get CPU usage for each process, the column of %CPU was always
showing 0.00. I first found this when using conky, then I found ps, top
and xfce4-taskmanager having the same problem. By the way, I can get the
total CPU usage correctly.
Because ps and top are in package procps and depend on libproc, I
thought there may be something wrong with the libproc. But
xfce4-taskmanager doesn't depends on it, so maybe something wrong with
my kernel, then I reinstalled package linux-image-2.6.26-1-686. Nothing
changs.
Thanks for help!
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 5.0
APT prefers proposed-updates
APT policy: (500, 'proposed-updates'), (500, 'stable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.26-1-686 (SMP w/1 CPU core)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 07:02:48PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> Do you still see this problem in the latest stable kernel package
> (package name linux-image-2.6.26-2-686, version 2.6.26-17)?
No further feedback, closing the bug.
If this can be reproduced with current kernels, please reopen this bug.
Cheers,
Moritz
--- End Message ---
