Re: kdelibs4!
Welcome to sid...On 10/19/05, Michele Concina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello!Anyone knows something about kdelibs4? it's several months that i'vethis unmet dependence and would like to know (if is possible) when it'llbe fixed. I basically need it to install softwares like rosegarden4 :-) thanks,michele--To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]-- Engañarse por amor es el engaño más terrible; es una pérdida eterna para la que no hay compensación ni en el tiempo ni en la eternidad. Kierkegaard Jaime Ochoa Malagón Integrated Technology Tel: (55) 52 54 26 10
unreal tournament 2004 for x86_64 on debian
is anyone out there running ut2004 x86_64 with nvidia drivers on debian for amd64 im pulling my hair out hear Dean -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Advice in switching from Mandriva 64 to Debian 64
I prefer to have the chroot I have 2 kinds of users, the first one works on 64 bits (sid could be sarge/etch), the second works over the chroot (sid but could be sarge/etch)... The trick is to run and configure both kdm (64 y 32 bits) to manage the login for the right user under the right enviroment (i had changed the wallpapaer to identify the enviroment login and disable the user login in the other enviroment)... Note: Just one X session could have DRI etc... Good luck On 10/20/05, Jean-Jacques de Jong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi,I am planning to switch to Debian from Mandriva. I have an AMD64 and Iwould like to exploit the 64 bits for those programs that really need it(video editing/transcoding, photo editing), and still run Firefox with Flash, OpenOffice, and Wine (CodeWeavers and Cedega).The issue is that the 32 bit applications need to be run by the rest ofthe family, and I fear a chroot environment would be too complex forthem (they just want to click on an icon and it must work). In the Howto, there appear to be two possibilities, a "quick start" anda chroot environment. Are they really different, I mean with the "quickstart" do I just need to install the ia32-libs package to get my above 32 bit apps running?Any advice is welcome!JJJ--To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]-- Engañarse por amor es el engaño más terrible; es una pérdida eterna para la que no hay compensación ni en el tiempo ni en la eternidad. Kierkegaard Jaime Ochoa Malagón Integrated Technology Tel: (55) 52 54 26 10
Re: Bug#314988: Still a problem?
On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 12:24:13AM -0400, Adam C Powell IV wrote: > Greetings, > > I'm wondering whether the last four months have provided enough time to > confirm this is still a bug deserving of the "grave" status. Because of > this bug, geomview has been removed from testing, which nearly derailed > the transition of about 40 packages today. > > Is it time to mark this "unreproducible", and/or change its severity > downward to "important"? Well, I certainly can't reproduce it: I don't have access to an amd64 system. AMD porters: can someone please test geomview? If it produces the error, could you try rebuilding it with the latest toolchain etc? Thanks, -Steve -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: why is amd64 still separate?
On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 07:59:03PM +0200, Gabor Gombas wrote: > On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 07:09:13AM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote: > > > How can I help? Is there a schedule for this? > > I'm not sure what the current status is, but I think you should ask on > debian-devel. There may be people already working on it or at least > having specific ideas how it should be done. Anthony 'Aj' Towns has it on his todo list; he accepts monetary contributions to pay for time, which can be directed towards a particular group of projects. "SCC implementation" is listed as one project, though I'm not sure if you can contribute specifically to projects as opposed to groups. http://www.erisian.com.au/market/ This scheme has recently resulted in Packages file diff support being rolled out. (The implementation was written by others but Aj integrated into into the actual instance of ftp-master.) Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SOLVED: Re: Asus A8N-E: /sbin/init: 432: cannot open dev/console: No such file
> Because I try to deviate as little as possible from a > stock distribution. (It's been literally years since > I had to build a custom kernel, and I intend to keep it > that way -- there are too many "exciting" things to deal > with already). Good point, less actual work. ;)
Re: SOLVED: Re: Asus A8N-E: /sbin/init: 432: cannot open dev/console: No such file
On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 03:38:06PM -0400, Robert Isaac wrote: > > I've tried that, but it doesn't support the hardware on > > that particular motherboard out of the box (e.g. the NIC > > is unsupported in stable, but is supported in unstable daily > > builds). > > Why not Sarge with a custom kernel to support your nic? Because I try to deviate as little as possible from a stock distribution. (It's been literally years since I had to build a custom kernel, and I intend to keep it that way -- there are too many "exciting" things to deal with already). Besides, it's interesting how Ubuntu compares to Debian on a noncritical server (I run stock Sarge elsewhere, with kernel-image-2.6.13-vs2.0.1-pre2-686_1_i386 on a couple of machines). They promise 18 months of support; we'll see how it goes. -- Eugen* Leitl http://leitl.org";>leitl __ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: SOLVED: Re: Asus A8N-E: /sbin/init: 432: cannot open dev/console: No such file
On 10/27/05, Eugen Leitl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 09:18:08PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 08:57:09AM +0200, Eugen Leitl wrote: > > > I've stuck with Ubuntu Server 5.10 AMD64 for time being, > > > because it's a stable distribution, and recognizes the > > > > Debian Sarge (a stable release) is also available on amd64. > > I've tried that, but it doesn't support the hardware on > that particular motherboard out of the box (e.g. the NIC > is unsupported in stable, but is supported in unstable daily > builds). Why not Sarge with a custom kernel to support your nic?
Re: Net boot install CD not working
On 10/27/05, . <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > lordSauron schrieb: > > In my experience overdoing security just locks you out more > > effectively. I've had a few fiascos with forgotten passwords and the > > world's only bullet-proof security system in my IBM laptop - long > > What have you been using to secure the laptop? excuse our OT-ness. I used IBM's proprietary Client Security software, which uses embedded hardware to secure and firewall the system. It's great for large corporate situations, but for a slightly deranged person who loves to fiddle with settings and rot it was a great equation for disaster. Oh, and never use 128-bit military-strength encryption for large amounts of data - you'll take forever to decrypt it (10 megs every 45 minutes - not fun) -- === GCB v3.1 === GCS d-(+) s+:- a? C+() UL+++() P L++(+++) E- W+(+++) N++ w--- M>++ PS-- PE Y+ PGP- t++(+++) 5? X? R !tv>-- b++> DI+++> D-- G !e h(*) !r x--- === EGCB v3.1 ===
Re: Firefox 1.5 beta on debian-unstable
I'd personally like to see it as a option to install in even the stable repositories, since I love ffx. Sorta like automake 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8 and 1.9 are all installable side-by-side, I'd like to see ffx 1.0.x and 1.5.x installable in the same manner, or at least have them as seperate packages so that I could choose between the two, even if it meant I couldn't have them installed side by side, it'd sate me, and it'd be good for those who aren't ready for the browser reloaded - again.
Re: why is amd64 still separate?
On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 07:09:13AM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote: > How can I help? Is there a schedule for this? I'm not sure what the current status is, but I think you should ask on debian-devel. There may be people already working on it or at least having specific ideas how it should be done. Gabor -- - MTA SZTAKI Computer and Automation Research Institute Hungarian Academy of Sciences - -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian amd64 mirror
http://www.eldemonionegro.com/wordpress/archivos/2005/09/05/corregir-fallos-de-apt-get-signatures/ A Dijous 27 Octubre 2005 23:09, Rodrigo Henriquez M. va escriure: > Hi. > > I've installed Debian Testing on my Pavilion ze2220la without troubles. > Everything works fine ;-) > > Howeverg, last week I've found troubles updating my packages list: > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sudo apt-get update > Des:1 http://debian.csail.mit.edu testing Release.gpg [189B] > Obj http://debian.csail.mit.edu testing Release > Ign http://debian.csail.mit.edu testing Release > Obj http://debian.csail.mit.edu testing/main Packages > Obj http://debian.csail.mit.edu testing/contrib > Packages > Obj http://debian.csail.mit.edu testing/non-free > Packages > Obj http://debian.csail.mit.edu testing/main > Sources > Obj http://debian.csail.mit.edu testing/contrib > Sources > Obj http://debian.csail.mit.edu testing/non-free > Sources > Descargados 189B en 11s > (17B/s) > Leyendo lista de paquetes... Hecho > W: GPG error: http://debian.csail.mit.edu testing Release: The following > signatures couldn't be verified because the public key is not available: > NO_PUBKEY E415B2B4B5F5BBED > > > I've tried a lot of mirrors with the same or similar result. > > Does anybody knows an official and _complete_ mirror for amd64? > > > TIA. > > > -- > Rodrigo Henríquez M. > Corporación Linux S.A. > http://www.clinux.cl
Re: 32-Bit module in AMD64-kernel ?
On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 02:31:22PM +0200, Erik Mouw wrote: > On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 01:25:49PM +0200, Hans wrote: > > I have a wlan-card, type "ipw-2100". It is possible to build a kernel > > module > > for 64bit-amd64-kernel. The problem is, the firmware is not working, as the > > firmware is 32-bit. A 32-bit-kernel (tested with knoppix, kantix and whax) > > works fine with the same firmware. > > The firmware shouldn't care about 32 or 64 bit. The firmware runs on > the wireless card, not on the host CPU. Some of the wireless drivers consist of an open-source wrapper plus a precompiled object, which does run on the host CPU and therefore does matter. (Similar situation to the proprietary NVIDIA drivers.) madwifi (for Atheros chips) is an example, though I don't think that applies in the Intel case. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Debian amd64 mirror
Hi. I've installed Debian Testing on my Pavilion ze2220la without troubles. Everything works fine ;-) Howeverg, last week I've found troubles updating my packages list: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sudo apt-get update Des:1 http://debian.csail.mit.edu testing Release.gpg [189B] Obj http://debian.csail.mit.edu testing Release Ign http://debian.csail.mit.edu testing Release Obj http://debian.csail.mit.edu testing/main Packages Obj http://debian.csail.mit.edu testing/contrib Packages Obj http://debian.csail.mit.edu testing/non-free Packages Obj http://debian.csail.mit.edu testing/main Sources Obj http://debian.csail.mit.edu testing/contrib Sources Obj http://debian.csail.mit.edu testing/non-free Sources Descargados 189B en 11s (17B/s) Leyendo lista de paquetes... Hecho W: GPG error: http://debian.csail.mit.edu testing Release: The following signatures couldn't be verified because the public key is not available: NO_PUBKEY E415B2B4B5F5BBED I've tried a lot of mirrors with the same or similar result. Does anybody knows an official and _complete_ mirror for amd64? TIA. -- Rodrigo Henríquez M. Corporación Linux S.A. http://www.clinux.cl -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 32-Bit module in AMD64-kernel ?
On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 01:25:49PM +0200, Hans wrote: > I have a question: > > If I have to compile 32-bit module for a 64-bit kernel (like it is in > debian-amd64), I suppose, this will not work, won´t it ? No, that doesn't work. > Background: > > I have a wlan-card, type "ipw-2100". It is possible to build a kernel module > for 64bit-amd64-kernel. The problem is, the firmware is not working, as the > firmware is 32-bit. A 32-bit-kernel (tested with knoppix, kantix and whax) > works fine with the same firmware. The firmware shouldn't care about 32 or 64 bit. The firmware runs on the wireless card, not on the host CPU. > So it was my idea, to build this module in 32-bit, as I have read, the kernel > supports both, 32-bit and 64-bit. The kernel support 32 and 64 bit *userland*, not 32 and 64 bit *modules*. > But I mean to remember, that someone said, all kernel-modules must be build > just like the kernel itself is build (here it is standard > debian-kernel-amd64) Correct. > Is my information correct ? Is there some other kind of compiling the > module ? Sure, see http://lwn.net/Articles/21823/ . > Is this (maybe) a bug ? (Information: the ipw-2100-module loads fine WITHOUT > firmware , as soon, I copy the firmware to /usr/lib/hotplug/firmwae and load > the ipw-2100-module, the whole system hangs up). That sounds like a bug in the driver to me. Please try with the latest kernel (2.6.14-rc5-git7), there were some IPW related driver updates the last couple of days. > BTW: I tried ndiswrapper, this will not work either. For ndiswrapper you need a 64 bit windows driver. Erik -- +-- Erik Mouw -- www.harddisk-recovery.com -- +31 70 370 12 90 -- | Lab address: Delftechpark 26, 2628 XH, Delft, The Netherlands -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Problem with installing Debian AMD64 on hp workstation 6200
Giacomo Mulas schrieb: >> Shouldn´t you better use the ia64 distribution? > > > no, he shouldn't: ia64 is for Itanium and would not work on a Xeon. Oh. I thought amd64 was for AMD only and ia64 for Intels. GH -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
32-Bit module in AMD64-kernel ?
Hi all, I have a question: If I have to compile 32-bit module for a 64-bit kernel (like it is in debian-amd64), I suppose, this will not work, won´t it ? Background: I have a wlan-card, type "ipw-2100". It is possible to build a kernel module for 64bit-amd64-kernel. The problem is, the firmware is not working, as the firmware is 32-bit. A 32-bit-kernel (tested with knoppix, kantix and whax) works fine with the same firmware. So it was my idea, to build this module in 32-bit, as I have read, the kernel supports both, 32-bit and 64-bit. But I mean to remember, that someone said, all kernel-modules must be build just like the kernel itself is build (here it is standard debian-kernel-amd64) Is my information correct ? Is there some other kind of compiling the module ? Is this (maybe) a bug ? (Information: the ipw-2100-module loads fine WITHOUT firmware , as soon, I copy the firmware to /usr/lib/hotplug/firmwae and load the ipw-2100-module, the whole system hangs up). BTW: I tried ndiswrapper, this will not work either. Best regards Hans -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SOLVED: Re: Asus A8N-E: /sbin/init: 432: cannot open dev/console: No such file
On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 09:18:08PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote: > On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 08:57:09AM +0200, Eugen Leitl wrote: > > I've stuck with Ubuntu Server 5.10 AMD64 for time being, > > because it's a stable distribution, and recognizes the > > Debian Sarge (a stable release) is also available on amd64. I've tried that, but it doesn't support the hardware on that particular motherboard out of the box (e.g. the NIC is unsupported in stable, but is supported in unstable daily builds). -- Eugen* Leitl http://leitl.org";>leitl __ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: SOLVED: Re: Asus A8N-E: /sbin/init: 432: cannot open dev/console: No such file
On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 08:57:09AM +0200, Eugen Leitl wrote: > I've stuck with Ubuntu Server 5.10 AMD64 for time being, > because it's a stable distribution, and recognizes the Debian Sarge (a stable release) is also available on amd64. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Unofficial amd64 kernel images?
On Thursday, 27.10.2005 at 12:05 +0200, Thomas Steffen wrote: > On 10/27/05, Dave Ewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The pre-packaged kernel, kernel-image-2.6.8-11-amd64-k8, does almost > > what I want, but the nvidia drivers cannot be compiled against it > > because there is a conflict between the framebuffer support in that > > kernel and the nvidia module. After a lot of work trying to build a > > suitable kernel myself, I can't see to be able to get it to work, so > > I've decided to seek out a prebuilt image instead. > > Just boot that kernel into text mode, extract the kernel source, copy > the config file from the installed kernel, do a make oldconfig, and > you should be ready to compile a new kernel. There were a few changes > in 2.6.12, but nothing fatal that I could find. Yes, I've tried that when building a new kernel: see the thread I posted starting at http://lists.debian.org/debian-amd64/2005/10/msg00769.html The short version is that building a 64-bit kernel on a system with a 64-bit kernel and a 32-bit userspace, with a 64-bit chroot for kernel-building, results in a kernel which doesn't seem to work for me. I spent a lot of time trying this, hence my quest for a pre-packaged variant :-) I'm happy to revisit that route later, if the search for a pre-package proves fruitless! > > Googling and search has been unsuccessful: I have been unable to find > > any other kernel-image-*-amd64-k8 kernels to try: does anyone have any > > unofficial kernel images that I may try? > > Note that kernels are called linux-image-* since 2.6.12! And there is > most definitely a 2.6.12 around: > > http://packages.debian.org/testing/base/linux-image-2.6.12-1-amd64-k8 > > Recompiling is still a good idea. It makes sure that you have the > right compiler installed (the one used to build the kernel). Yes, I agree: I'd prefer to do that, but I've been having difficulties, which is unfortunate. Thanks for the above link ... Dave. -- Dave Ewart [EMAIL PROTECTED] Computing Manager, Cancer Epidemiology Unit Cancer Research UK / Oxford University PGP: CC70 1883 BD92 E665 B840 118B 6E94 2CFD 694D E370 Get key from http://www.ceu.ox.ac.uk/~davee/davee-ceu-ox-ac-uk.asc N 51.7518, W 1.2016 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Unofficial amd64 kernel images?
i just built one 2.6.14-rc4 no less its faster than the 2.6.12 and i just used the 2.6.12-1-amd64-k8 config file (and hit enter for the rest) alsa seems to know my sound card better. however eject, mount etc still all cause kernel oops see dmesg i sent earlier today Dean On Thu, October 27, 2005 8:05 pm, Thomas Steffen said: > On 10/27/05, Dave Ewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> The pre-packaged kernel, kernel-image-2.6.8-11-amd64-k8, does almost >> what I want, but the nvidia drivers cannot be compiled against it >> because there is a conflict between the framebuffer support in that >> kernel and the nvidia module. After a lot of work trying to build a >> suitable kernel myself, I can't see to be able to get it to work, so >> I've decided to seek out a prebuilt image instead. > > Just boot that kernel into text mode, extract the kernel source, copy > the config file from the installed kernel, do a make oldconfig, and > you should be ready to compile a new kernel. There were a few changes > in 2.6.12, but nothing fatal that I could find. > >> Googling and search has been unsuccessful: I have been unable to find >> any other kernel-image-*-amd64-k8 kernels to try: does anyone have any >> unofficial kernel images that I may try? > > Note that kernels are called linux-image-* since 2.6.12! And there is > most definitely a 2.6.12 around: > > http://packages.debian.org/testing/base/linux-image-2.6.12-1-amd64-k8 > > Recompiling is still a good idea. It makes sure that you have the > right compiler installed (the one used to build the kernel). > > Thomas > > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Unofficial amd64 kernel images?
On 10/27/05, Dave Ewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The pre-packaged kernel, kernel-image-2.6.8-11-amd64-k8, does almost > what I want, but the nvidia drivers cannot be compiled against it > because there is a conflict between the framebuffer support in that > kernel and the nvidia module. After a lot of work trying to build a > suitable kernel myself, I can't see to be able to get it to work, so > I've decided to seek out a prebuilt image instead. Just boot that kernel into text mode, extract the kernel source, copy the config file from the installed kernel, do a make oldconfig, and you should be ready to compile a new kernel. There were a few changes in 2.6.12, but nothing fatal that I could find. > Googling and search has been unsuccessful: I have been unable to find > any other kernel-image-*-amd64-k8 kernels to try: does anyone have any > unofficial kernel images that I may try? Note that kernels are called linux-image-* since 2.6.12! And there is most definitely a 2.6.12 around: http://packages.debian.org/testing/base/linux-image-2.6.12-1-amd64-k8 Recompiling is still a good idea. It makes sure that you have the right compiler installed (the one used to build the kernel). Thomas
Re: Unofficial amd64 kernel images?
Le Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 10:31:12AM +0100, Dave Ewart écrivait/wrote: > As you may have read in another thread, I'm having difficulties building > a 64-bit amd64 kernel to use in a "64-bit kernel / 32-bit userspace" > environment. > > The pre-packaged kernel, kernel-image-2.6.8-11-amd64-k8, does almost > what I want, but the nvidia drivers cannot be compiled against it > because there is a conflict between the framebuffer support in that > kernel and the nvidia module. After a lot of work trying to build a > suitable kernel myself, I can't see to be able to get it to work, so > I've decided to seek out a prebuilt image instead. What I am doing (on a ATI based laptop see http://starynkevitch.net/Basile/msi_s270_linux.html for details) is compiling my own kernel (2.6.13.4 from kernel.org), making the .deb packages with make-kpkg binary-arch, and installing these .deb Notice that kernels did change a lot since 2.6.8 Regards -- Basile STARYNKEVITCH http://starynkevitch.net/Basile/ email: basile(at)starynkevitch(dot)net 8, rue de la Faïencerie, 92340 Bourg La Reine, France -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Problem with installing Debian AMD64 on hp workstation 6200
On Thu, 27 Oct 2005, . wrote: Emmanuel Gamby schrieb: We have several hp workstation xw6200 (Xeon 3.20Ghz HT, EM64T) and we would like to install debian on them. I downloaded the debian-amd64-netinst.iso Shouldn�t you better use the ia64 distribution? no, he shouldn't: ia64 is for Itanium and would not work on a Xeon. Giacomo -- _ Giacomo Mulas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _ OSSERVATORIO ASTRONOMICO DI CAGLIARI Str. 54, Loc. Poggio dei Pini * 09012 Capoterra (CA) Tel. (OAC): +39 070 71180 248 Fax : +39 070 71180 222 Tel. (UNICA): +39 070 675 4916 _ "When the storms are raging around you, stay right where you are" (Freddy Mercury) _ -- Il messaggio e' stato analizzato alla ricerca di virus o contenuti pericolosi da MailScanner, ed e' risultato non infetto.
Unofficial amd64 kernel images?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 As you may have read in another thread, I'm having difficulties building a 64-bit amd64 kernel to use in a "64-bit kernel / 32-bit userspace" environment. The pre-packaged kernel, kernel-image-2.6.8-11-amd64-k8, does almost what I want, but the nvidia drivers cannot be compiled against it because there is a conflict between the framebuffer support in that kernel and the nvidia module. After a lot of work trying to build a suitable kernel myself, I can't see to be able to get it to work, so I've decided to seek out a prebuilt image instead. Googling and search has been unsuccessful: I have been unable to find any other kernel-image-*-amd64-k8 kernels to try: does anyone have any unofficial kernel images that I may try? Even better, if you have the corresponding nvidia-kernel-* package for it too! I'm using Sarge, but neither the Etch, Sid or Experimental repositories have any other amd64-k8 kernels. Thanks in advance for any pointers, Dave. - -- Dave Ewart [EMAIL PROTECTED] Computing Manager, Cancer Epidemiology Unit Cancer Research UK / Oxford University PGP: CC70 1883 BD92 E665 B840 118B 6E94 2CFD 694D E370 Get key from http://www.ceu.ox.ac.uk/~davee/davee-ceu-ox-ac-uk.asc N 51.7518, W 1.2016 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDYJ5gbpQs/WlN43ARAhX7AJ41zq5U3XuZSHH8MB25JS4m2xIGhACfSeHc FGcQoWIHRsKhRs3PmNy1IUM= =mJqZ -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#335653: Install failure with Etch 24-Oct-2005 snapshot
Hi, I have had about the same trouble with the daily installers. Let me know if you need the logfiles and where to send them to. GH Frans Pop schrieb: > reassign 335653 debian-cd > severity 335653 important > retitle 335653 Several required packages missing on amd64 20051024 daily > thanks > > On Wednesday 26 October 2005 09:20, Anthony Lau wrote: > >>Attached is /var/log/messages with "set -x" in debootstrap. > > > Thanks very much! This makes the issue a lot clearer. > > As we've seen no other reports of this issue, I feel that it may be amd64 > specific. It would be great if an amd64 porter could try to reproduce/debug > this. > > Note: a new debootstrap has just entered unstable, so the issue may fix > itself. This error is with 20051024 netinst image that has debootstrap > 0.3.1.9. > Note: there were two NMUs to fix problems; those may have been broken. > Note: a problem with the new debootstrap was discovered today; a new > base-installer has been uploaded to fix this. > > An analysis of the problem follows. > > The problem is fairly in the beginning where a list of "required" packages > to be installed is built. > > + get_debs Priority: required > + local m1=file:///cdrom > + local c=main > + local path=dists/etch/main/binary-amd64/Packages > + apt_dest pkg etch main amd64 file:///cdrom > dists/etch/main/binary-amd64/Packages > + local m=file:///cdrom > + m=debootstrap.invalid > + printf %s var/lib/apt/lists/ > + echo debootstrap.invalid_dists/etch/main/binary-amd64/Packages > + sed s/\//_/g > + local > pkgdest=/target/var/lib/apt/lists/debootstrap.invalid_dists_etch_main_binary-amd64_Packages > + local field=Priority: > + shift > + /usr/lib/debootstrap/pkgdetails FIELD Priority: file:///cdrom > /target/var/lib/apt/lists/debootstrap.invalid_dists_etch_main_binary-amd64_Packages > required > + sed s/ .*// > + echo mawk makedev libc6 gcc-4.0-base libgcc1 libstdc++6 grep e2fsprogs > e2fslibs libblkid1 libcomerr2 libss2 libuuid1 debianutils libdb4.3 debconf > debconf-i18n dpkg coreutils libpam0g libpam-runtime libpam-modules perl-base > procps libselinux1 libsepol1 libacl1 libattr1 passwd login libslang2 sed > sysvinit initscripts sysv-rc libcap1 liblocale-gettext-perl > libtext-iconv-perl libtext-wrapi18n-perl libtext-charwidth-perl zlib1g > libnewt0.51 ncurses-bin libncurses5 util-linux lsb-base base-passwd bash > base-files > > Several required packages, including mount, are missing from this list for > some reason. This means that the /usr/lib/debootstrap/pkgdetails command > is failing somehow. > The problem may be in the script, but it may also be in the CD. > > Hmmm. Looks like the problem is in the CD image: > find /cdrom/pool/main/ -name mount* > /cdrom/pool/main/l/loop-aes-utils/mount-aes-udeb_2.12p-9_amd64.udeb > /cdrom/pool/main/m/mountfloppy > /cdrom/pool/main/m/mountfloppy/mountfloppy_0.4_all.udeb > > The package mount is completely missing... Reassigning to debian-cd. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Building amd64/k8 kernel from 32-bit userspace
On Wednesday, 26.10.2005 at 12:18 +0100, Dave Ewart wrote: > > > [...] > > > > > > However, when I try to install this for the host system, this error > > > occurs: > > > > > > # dpkg -i kernel-image-2.6.12_+davee.1.0_amd64.deb > > > > > > dpkg: error processing kernel-image-2.6.12_+davee.1.0_amd64.deb > > > (--install): > > > package architecture (amd64) does not match system (i386) > > > Errors were encountered while processing: > > > kernel-image-2.6.12_+davee.1.0_amd64.deb > > > > That is correct. You compiled on amd64 and for amd64. Try mount --bind > > /boot /chroot/boot and install the kernel inside the chroot. > > > > Alternatively dpkg --force-architecture. > > > > Or you can change the architecture of the deb with (from memory) > > > > echo '#!/bin/sh' >/tmp/foo.sh > > echo "sed -i 's/Architecture: amd64/Architecture: i386/' DEBIAN/control" > > >>/tmp/foo.sh > > chmod a+x /tmp/foo.sh > > fakeroot dpkg-reversion -k /tmp/foo.sh > > kernel-image-2.6.12_+davee.1.0_amd64.deb "change arch to i386" > > OK, will try those methods. As a result of your second post here, I > will dispute your remark above which says "That way it all just > magically works." :-) Hmmm, the kernels can be installed as above, but don't seem to behave very well. Perhaps I'll give up on this for now and try to seek out some other precompiled kernel images for amd64 ... Thanks for your help, anyway. Dave. -- Dave Ewart [EMAIL PROTECTED] Computing Manager, Cancer Epidemiology Unit Cancer Research UK / Oxford University PGP: CC70 1883 BD92 E665 B840 118B 6E94 2CFD 694D E370 Get key from http://www.ceu.ox.ac.uk/~davee/davee-ceu-ox-ac-uk.asc N 51.7518, W 1.2016 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Problem with installing Debian AMD64 on hp workstation 6200
Emmanuel Gamby schrieb: > We have several hp workstation xw6200 (Xeon 3.20Ghz HT, EM64T) and we > would like to install debian on them. I downloaded the > debian-amd64-netinst.iso Shouldn´t you better use the ia64 distribution? GH -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Firefox 1.5 beta on debian-unstable
Hi, I'm using in last one week firefox 1.5 beta 2 on debian, and it seems very stable (no crashes until now), more quick rendering pages, and no problem for "overlap-characters". A my friend confirmed it using Firefox 1.5 on Windows XP. Would be a bad idea include it directly in amd64-debian-unstable repository instead of firefox 1.0.7? Giulio
