Hi together,
I have a Debian Sid amd64 installed. Now I would like to use wine for
32bit Windows applications (esp. Watchtower Library). I don't want to
use a chroot environment. As I found out, may be one day there will be a
ia32-libs-wine to install and then a i386 wine will work. But I don't
Hi there,
> Did I misunderstand this? I took it as saying that I wanted a source
> from each. I am in no way a real experienced linux user, so I
> wouldn't be surprised if I screwed up. I am guessing I want to remove
> the gcc-3.4 sources, correct? Hopefully this wont junk up my install
> at a
Lennart Sorensen schrieb:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~# hdparm -tT /dev/sda
/dev/sda:
Timing cached reads: 2188 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1093.07 MB/sec
HDIO_DRIVE_CMD(null) (wait for flush complete) failed: Inappropriate
ioctl for device
Timing buffered disk reads: 96 MB in 3.03 seconds = 31.69 MB/sec
H
Superuserman wrote:
Also, I used my custom kernel 2.6.11 to build the above 2.6.10 so that
might be faster
than using a debian-dist kernel.
I build on a custom 2.6.11, too, (else SATA won't work) and I tried a
2.6.12-rc1-mm1, too, just to be sure, my problems didn't get fixed in
the meantime.
I
Hi!
I have doom3 running with ia32-libs. Everything is fine except the it gives the
following error and the sound is disabled during the game. What can I do to fix
up the problem?
Sound works fine for 64-bit applications.
-- Alsa Sound Initialization -
ALSA lib confmisc.c:550:(snd_determi
>From the Debian AMD64 How-To
"The sources.list
The primary pure64 archive is on alioth, and there are some mirrors
available. Alioth is rather slow from Europe, so you may want to use
one of the mirrors if you live there.
This is a complete list of publically accessible mirrors for your
sources
Do you want inexpensive Valium?
http://www.nlav.com/p/viks/19
or 160 other drugs:
http://www.nlav.com/p/viks
you algorithm me crosswort me you confirmatory me tart me
you bedroom me ferroelectric me you ret me paranoia me you newport me coffin
me
http://wlue.com/1.php
--
To U
On Wednesday 23 March 2005 16:33, John Baab wrote:
> here is my sources.list
> deb http://debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org/debian-pure64 sid main
> contrib non-free
> ...
> deb http://debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org/gcc-3.4 sid main contrib non-free
So does this mean you are mixing packages from the
Oliver writes:
What is a normal build-time for a 2.6.11 kernel with reasonable hardware
support (USB,
SATA, ATA, On-Board Sound, Firewire ...), with many features compiled into the
kernel?
+++
I just built the 2.6.11 kernel from the kernel.org bz2 with a surprising result:
BUI
Appears to be fixed now, as I just nabbed a new version of apt from
the source listed above and I no longer get the unmet dependency.
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 19:33:38 -0500, John Baab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Since doing my apt-get upgrade today I have been getting hit with an
> unmet dependency:
Goswin writes:
The /pure64 might not be around in the future.
Thanks for the warning. This is very important!
Does everybody STOP using these (weren't they all symlinks?)?
http://debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org/pure64/dists/exp
http://debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org/pure64/di
Oliver writes:
What is a normal build-time for a 2.6.11 kernel with reasonable hardware
support (USB,
SATA, ATA, On-Board Sound, Firewire ...), with many features compiled into the
kernel?
Here is the time output for 2.6.10 using make-kpkg to build the kernel-image
d
Since doing my apt-get upgrade today I have been getting hit with an
unmet dependency:
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
synaptic: Depends: libapt-pkg-libc6.3-6-3.3
E: Broken packages
here is my sources.list
deb http://debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org/debian-pure64 sid main
contrib
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 08:48:18PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Please file a bugreport about this.
[x] done.
ciao, Dirk
--
| Akkuschrauber Kaufberatung and AEG GSM stuff |
| Visit my homepage: http://www.nutrimatic.ping.de/ |
| FIDO: Dirk Salva 2:244/6305.10 Internet: d
On Wednesday 23 March 2005 03:46 pm, Javier Kohen wrote:
> El mié, 23-03-2005 a las 15:38 -0600, Damon Chesser escribió:
> > It is, thank you. apt-cache show and dpkg -s xfe do not show a
> > maintainer for xfe.
>
> $ apt-cache show xfe | grep ^Maintainer
> Maintainer: Bastian Kleineidam <[EMAIL P
Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Proulx) writes:
>
>> In the debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org/debian-pure64 archive:
>>
>> Current output from debmirror:
>>
>> pool/main/r/rpl/rpl_1.5.1_all.deb failed md5sum check
>
> Fixed already.
>
>> pool/non-free/p/p
El miÃ, 23-03-2005 a las 15:38 -0600, Damon Chesser escribiÃ:
> It is, thank you. apt-cache show and dpkg -s xfe do not show a maintainer
> for
> xfe.
$ apt-cache show xfe | grep ^Maintainer
Maintainer: Bastian Kleineidam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Same for dpkg -s.
Greetings,
--
Javier Kohen <[EM
John Baab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have just come to realize that durring my sarge net install
> yesterday, I manually input sid sources into apt. Am I going to have
> any problems with this in the future, or have I basically upgraded my
> system from sarge to sid?
No more than any other
Jérôme Warnier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Le mercredi 23 mars 2005 à 21:11 +0100, Goswin von Brederlow a écrit :
>> Jérôme Warnier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > Le jeudi 03 mars 2005 à 20:08 +0100, Goswin von Brederlow a écrit :
>> >> Dr Gavin Seddon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >>
>>
On Wednesday 23 March 2005 03:11 pm, Javier Kohen wrote:
> Hi Damon,
>
> El mié, 23-03-2005 a las 15:02 -0600, Damon Chesser escribió:
> > > Note that users have no permissions to the mountpoint. While udev
> > > should hide that entry for various reasons xfe should not fail on it
> > > either. I s
I've had no problems with my AMD64 debian servers.
My only beef with the desktop is the lack of flash. Abiword and gnumeric
work well and I think they're faster then OpenOffice.
On Wed, 2005-03-23 at 21:55 +0100, dr.bob wrote:
> Hi
>
> I need to set up one such machine as a Debian-based server.
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 09:55:32PM +0100, dr.bob wrote:
> I need to set up one such machine as a Debian-based server. What would
> you recomend - going 64 bit with debian-amd64, or sticking to ia32?
> This is a rack server, nobody's going to use it as a desktop so I
> don't care about compat with o
Hi
I need to set up one such machine as a Debian-based server. What would
you recomend - going 64 bit with debian-amd64, or sticking to ia32?
This is a rack server, nobody's going to use it as a desktop so I
don't care about compat with openoffice etc., it will be doing dhcp,
nfs, remote boot , ..
Hi Damon,
El miÃ, 23-03-2005 a las 15:02 -0600, Damon Chesser escribiÃ:
> > Note that users have no permissions to the mountpoint. While udev
> > should hide that entry for various reasons xfe should not fail on it
> > either. I suggest finding the problem in xfe before udev hides the
> > problem
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Sythos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 03:18:09PM +0100, Adam Podstawczynski wrote:
Adam Podstawczynski wrote:
http://debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org/pure64/pool/unstable/main/amd64/k/kernel-source-2.6.8/kernel-source-2.6.8_2.6.8-14_all.deb
Plus the
On Wednesday 23 March 2005 02:08 pm, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Damon Chesser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Monday 21 March 2005 01:24 pm, Javier Kohen wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> El lun, 21-03-2005 a las 07:16 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
> >> > the subject is the error I get while run
I have just come to realize that durring my sarge net install
yesterday, I manually input sid sources into apt. Am I going to have
any problems with this in the future, or have I basically upgraded my
system from sarge to sid?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "uns
Le mercredi 23 mars 2005 à 21:11 +0100, Goswin von Brederlow a écrit :
> Jérôme Warnier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Le jeudi 03 mars 2005 à 20:08 +0100, Goswin von Brederlow a écrit :
> >> Dr Gavin Seddon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>
> >> > Hi,
> >> > I have decided to downgrade to sarg
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Proulx) writes:
> In the debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org/debian-pure64 archive:
>
> Current output from debmirror:
>
> pool/main/r/rpl/rpl_1.5.1_all.deb failed md5sum check
Fixed already.
> pool/non-free/p/php4-dbase/php4-dbase_4.3.4+rcfinal-3.diff.gz failed md5sum
> c
Sythos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 03:18:09PM +0100, Adam Podstawczynski wrote:
>> Adam Podstawczynski wrote:
>> >http://debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org/pure64/pool/unstable/main/amd64/k/kernel-source-2.6.8/kernel-source-2.6.8_2.6.8-14_all.deb
>> >
>> >
>> Plus the "404 N
El miÃ, 23-03-2005 a las 21:08 +0100, Goswin von Brederlow escribiÃ:
> >> This doesn't seem to be a Debian AMD64-specific bug. The above change
> >> was introduced last week in the udev package. Maybe you should contact
> >> the xfe author, as it looks like a bug there.
> >>
> >> Greetings,
> > Ty,
Jérôme Warnier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Le jeudi 03 mars 2005 à 20:08 +0100, Goswin von Brederlow a écrit :
>> Dr Gavin Seddon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > Hi,
>> > I have decided to downgrade to sarge. On of the beutiful things about
>> > Debian, I just need to modify /etc/apt/sourc
Philipp Winkler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi list,
>
> I´ve got a sid pur64 on my machine.
> Every some day (has ben twice now) the 32bit apps won´t run.
> Failures are "... file not found"
> My solution was to purge and reinstall the ia3-libs. After the
> reinstall of the libs the apps ran fi
Damon Chesser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Monday 21 March 2005 01:24 pm, Javier Kohen wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> El lun, 21-03-2005 a las 07:16 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
>> > the subject is the error I get while running xfe file manager. I have
>> > ran sid for quite some time, and have ne
Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [Please repect the MFT; I'm not subscribed]
>
> I'm trying to clear up my buglog, and #290758 is amd64-only. I have no
> means of testing this bug myself, and being an X package it isn't
> particularly conducive to network testing.
>
> I requested the
Ed Cogburn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Monday 14 March 2005 5:05pm, Taketoshi Sano wrote:
>> Hi.
>>
>> Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Just plain lseek will do. With _FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 that is all you
>> > need. I don't see the point of using the lseek64 alias.
>>
>>
Superuserman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 5B. For a sid-amd64-netinst.iso use this /etc/apt/sources.list or a mirror:
>
> deb http://debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org/pure64 sid main contrib non-free
No.
deb http://debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org/debian-pure64 sid main contrib
non-free
The /pure6
Lourens Steenkamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hello Everyone,
>
> My first upgrade on my pure-64 has just bitten the dust.
> I did not change the kernel which was installed in December 2004.
>
> ran "apt-get update"
> Using Synaptic, I did the update in batches, upgrading the things that
> I use
Dirk Salva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
>
> could it be, that kaboodle in pure64 (sarge) is broken? When I start
> trying to view an mpeg or something else (like from leech.dk),
> kaboodle only starts, but does not play. When I push play-button, it
> breaks with a sigsev (KDE-crash-notifier).
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 08:57:59AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> But who needs 25 Ethernet drivers, and 2 dozen chipset drivers?
> (Except during install, of course.)
>
> And how few modern desktops really need low-level SCSI drivers?
Most of the time I use the Debian kernel images. Why should I
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 04:25:42PM +0100, Oliver Korpilla wrote:
> hdparm -tT /dev/sda
>
> /dev/sda:
> Timing cached reads: 2204 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1102.17 MB/sec
> HDIO_DRIVE_CMD(null) (wait for flush complete) failed: Inappropriate
> ioctl for device
> Timing buffered disk reads: 96 MB
On Wednesday 23 March 2005 09:37 am, John Baab wrote:
> I think
> Mike's recomendation will achieve the same results as changing the
> partition where grub boots to, does anyone see any reason why one is
> better than the other?
There is a better description of the difficulty GRUB has in relying o
In the debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org/debian-pure64 archive:
Current output from debmirror:
pool/main/r/rpl/rpl_1.5.1_all.deb failed md5sum check
pool/non-free/p/php4-dbase/php4-dbase_4.3.4+rcfinal-3.diff.gz failed md5sum
check
Could some check and correct those?
Thanks
Bob
signature.asc
Javier Kohen schrieb:
Yep, same time for my old AMD XP 1800+ and kernel 2.6.x and gcc 3.2.x or
3.3.x (don't remember). I'm sure my Mobile AMD Athlon 64 3000+ notebook
takes much less than 20 minutes, but I don't have real numbers to back
that up now.
Note to the casual reader: these are 32-bit CPUs
El miÃ, 23-03-2005 a las 15:38 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribiÃ:
> > Jeez. Athlon 2200+, 1GB RAM, 100GB ATA/133 drive, with a "desktop"
> > .config file (i.e., no low-level SCSI drivers, weird filesystems,
> > etc, but all USB, firewire, bluetooth, etc options chosen) and it
> > takes about 12
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005, Oliver Korpilla wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~# hdparm -tT /dev/sda
/dev/sda:
Timing cached reads: 2188 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1093.07 MB/sec
HDIO_DRIVE_CMD(null) (wait for flush complete) failed: Inappropriate ioctl
for device
Timing buffered disk reads: 96 MB in 3.03 seconds
After playing with this all of yesterday, I think I have figured out
what was going wrong. It seems that no matter what I did, grub
installed to the mbr of the IDE hard drive. So I removed the IDE HD,
installed onto the SATA and it booted fine (I believe I should have
been able to do this by tell
On Wed, 2005-03-23 at 15:20 +, Dr Gavin Seddon wrote:
> Hi,
> I have a hp laser printer connected to another box on my lan. How do I
> add this to my local machine so that I may print from here?
How does the printer talk to the other machine? SMB, lpr, lpd,
CUPS, etc?
--
--
Giacomo Mulas schrieb:
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005, Oliver Korpilla wrote:
What can you read out of this? (straight from dmesg)
It looks like it is using DMA. What is the output of hdparm -tT ?
I get:
galileo:~# hdparm -tT /dev/sda
/dev/sda:
Timing cached reads: 2536 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1266.93 MB/s
Hi,
I have a hp laser printer connected to another box on my lan. How do I
add this to my local machine so that I may print from here?
Gavin.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005, Oliver Korpilla wrote:
What can you read out of this? (straight from dmesg)
It looks like it is using DMA. What is the output of hdparm -tT ?
I get:
galileo:~# hdparm -tT /dev/sda
/dev/sda:
Timing cached reads: 2536 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1266.93 MB/sec
HDIO_DRIVE_CMD(null)
On Wed, 2005-03-23 at 09:39 -0500, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 08:34:39AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > kernel-source-2.6.10
> >
> > Jeez. Athlon 2200+, 1GB RAM, 100GB ATA/133 drive, with a "desktop"
> > .config file (i.e., no low-level SCSI drivers, weird filesystems,
> >
> And where is the bonnie++ test with 64bit kernel? Do any of the FS become
> faster/slower? Actualy I wan't three runs: 32bit kernel, 64bit kernel +
> 32bit userland, 64bit kernel+userland.
OK, here are those results for ext2, ext3, xfs, jfs, reiserfs, and reiser4:
http://www.the-martins.org/modu
Lennart Sorensen wrote:
Well at least very similar speeds seem not too unreasonable. I am not
sure if the 64bit pointers would hurt the performance of gcc in any way.
It does have to move more bytes around than a 32bit machine. it is
certainly faster at many tasks.
It is probably not as much the
Giacomo Mulas schrieb:
Have a look at whether DMA is enabled in the disk driver you are using.
If not, high disk throughput will cost you a lot of CPU power. You can
find out by looking at the kernel messages at boot, for example on one
of my boxes I see lines like
ata1: SATA max UDMA/133 cmd 0
Lennart Sorensen schrieb:
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 03:32:15PM +0100, Oliver Korpilla wrote:
Yeah, but slower??
Well at least very similar speeds seem not too unreasonable. I am not
sure if the 64bit pointers would hurt the performance of gcc in any way.
It does have to move more bytes around than
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, but more than a half of the compile time up to 2/3rds account to system
time, which I think is somewhat excessive.
Maybe it's not processor related, but to the disk driver? Any way to find
out?
Have a look at whether DMA is enabled in the disk
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 08:34:39AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> kernel-source-2.6.10
>
> Jeez. Athlon 2200+, 1GB RAM, 100GB ATA/133 drive, with a "desktop"
> .config file (i.e., no low-level SCSI drivers, weird filesystems,
> etc, but all USB, firewire, bluetooth, etc options chosen) and it
> ta
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 08:34:39AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-03-23 at 08:44 -0500, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 10:31:17AM +0100, Oliver Korpilla wrote:
> > > What is a normal build-time for a 2.6.11 kernel with reasonable hardware
> > > support (USB, SATA, AT
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 03:32:15PM +0100, Oliver Korpilla wrote:
> Yeah, but slower??
Well at least very similar speeds seem not too unreasonable. I am not
sure if the 64bit pointers would hurt the performance of gcc in any way.
It does have to move more bytes around than a 32bit machine. it is
On 05-Mar-23 09:30, Per Bojsen wrote:
> *** Regarding Re: PHP4 causes apache to fail to start; Andreas Jochens
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> adds:
>
> Andreas> - my_free((char*)root->name);
> Andreas> + my_free(root->name);
>
> Andreas> I do not think that this patch is the cause for your
> Andreas>
On Wed, 2005-03-23 at 08:44 -0500, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 10:31:17AM +0100, Oliver Korpilla wrote:
> > What is a normal build-time for a 2.6.11 kernel with reasonable hardware
> > support (USB, SATA, ATA, On-Board Sound, Firewire ...), with many
> > features compiled in
Ron Johnson schrieb:
Yeah, but slower??
gcc 3.x is known to be slow, and I think I remember reading that
it's even slower on AMD64.
Any idea how to benchmark if this problem is general or gcc-specific??
Thanks and with kind regards,
Oliver Korpilla
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with
Sythos wrote:
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 03:18:09PM +0100, Adam Podstawczynski wrote:
Adam Podstawczynski wrote:
http://debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org/pure64/pool/unstable/main/amd64/k/kernel-source-2.6.8/kernel-source-2.6.8_2.6.8-14_all.deb
Plus the "404 Not Found" line, of course.
Try "apt-get upd
Sven Mueller schrieb:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 23/03/2005 14:53:
Well, but more than a half of the compile time up to 2/3rds account to
system time, which I think is somewhat excessive.
Sounds as if you don't have DMA enabled on the discs.
I think so, too, but seem not to be able to change that
*** Regarding Re: PHP4 causes apache to fail to start; Andreas Jochens
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> adds:
Andreas> - my_free((char*)root->name);
Andreas> + my_free(root->name);
Andreas> I do not think that this patch is the cause for your
Andreas> problems.
I agree, this patch should have nothing to
On Wed, 2005-03-23 at 15:32 +0100, Oliver Korpilla wrote:
> Lennart Sorensen schrieb:
> > On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 02:53:16PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> >>That's the strange thing - my AMD64 3500+ in 64-bit mode, with 2 GB of
> >>memory and a 250 Gb drive, takes about 30min. But this sy
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 23/03/2005 14:53:
Well, but more than a half of the compile time up to 2/3rds account to
system time, which I think is somewhat excessive.
Sounds as if you don't have DMA enabled on the discs.
What does 'hdparm -d' say about your disc(s)? -c might also be interesting.
cu
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 03:18:09PM +0100, Adam Podstawczynski wrote:
> Adam Podstawczynski wrote:
> >http://debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org/pure64/pool/unstable/main/amd64/k/kernel-source-2.6.8/kernel-source-2.6.8_2.6.8-14_all.deb
> >
> >
> Plus the "404 Not Found" line, of course.
Try "apt-get up
Lennart Sorensen schrieb:
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 02:53:16PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's the strange thing - my AMD64 3500+ in 64-bit mode, with 2 GB of
memory and a 250 Gb drive, takes about 30min. But this system _should_
have more oomph, not less!
Well the Athlon 2800+ is 2087Mhz s
Adam Podstawczynski wrote:
http://debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org/pure64/pool/unstable/main/amd64/k/kernel-source-2.6.8/kernel-source-2.6.8_2.6.8-14_all.deb
Plus the "404 Not Found" line, of course.
--
Adam Podstawczyński
www.podstawczynski.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 02:53:16PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> That's the strange thing - my AMD64 3500+ in 64-bit mode, with 2 GB of
> memory and a 250 Gb drive, takes about 30min. But this system _should_
> have more oomph, not less!
Well the Athlon 2800+ is 2087Mhz so at least for raw c
Hi everyone,
I'm not sure if this is the correct way of reporting missing files, and
whether I'm not making some obvious mistake myself, but this is what I
get today after trying to install kernel source for 2.6.8:
http://debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org/pure64/pool/unstable/main/amd64/k/kernel-so
Lennart Sorensen wrote:
I'm doing this on a 3500+ @ 2.2 GHz, so what should I expect? How many
time spent in the system and how many in user?
Compiling a 2.6.10 kernel on my Athlon 2800+ with 1GB ram and a 120GB
SATA drive with the features debian has enabled by default in their
kernels and a coup
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 10:31:17AM +0100, Oliver Korpilla wrote:
> What is a normal build-time for a 2.6.11 kernel with reasonable hardware
> support (USB, SATA, ATA, On-Board Sound, Firewire ...), with many
> features compiled into the kernel?
>
> I'm doing this on a 3500+ @ 2.2 GHz, so what sh
Hi,
I have installed vmware on chroot 32bit. However, I am having
difficulty installing the any-any patch suggested. Can anyone help?
Thanks.
Gavin.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello!
What is a normal build-time for a 2.6.11 kernel with reasonable hardware
support (USB, SATA, ATA, On-Board Sound, Firewire ...), with many
features compiled into the kernel?
I'm doing this on a 3500+ @ 2.2 GHz, so what should I expect? How many
time spent in the system and how many in us
Hello,
thank you for the bug report.
On 05-Mar-22 23:28, Per Bojsen wrote:
> about 10 days ago I rebooted after about a month of uptime and
> discovered that apache did not start properly. It would start but
> hang before finishing its initialization. It would not serve any web
> pages. Today
78 matches
Mail list logo
