chroot: firefox browser plugins
Hi, I just built myself a 64-bit AMD X2 desktop system and decided I'd give a 64-bit distro a shot. On my recently ebayed last system I was using 32-bit Sarge for just over a year and loved it. I am now happily running Etch RC1 64-bit. Happily? Well, almost For the relatively few 32-bit programs I need/want to run, I opted for the chroot method (as described in the Debian AMD64 HOWTO). I installed Firefox 2.0.0.1 by unpacking the archive from getfirefox.com into /usr/local in my chroot (I prefer not to use Debian-packaged firefox because I've found it to be more crash prone). The browser starts up without a hitch. But, for the life of me, I am unable to create any symlinks in /usr/local/firefox/plugins to the currently installed plugins in the chroot (acrobat and java, atm). Each time I try, it results in a dangling symlink (and, yes, I am issuing each command from within the chroot). I thought it might be a permissions issue (even though I didn't change any), so I tried unpacking firefox in bind-mounted /home/. No change. I also tried 3 methods of installing Sun Java - from the Debian repo, from sun.com, and building locally using java-package. Again, no ability to symlink to the java plugin. I don't get it. I can create symlinks to any other files/dirs in the chroot, just not browser plugins?? I have read permissions on all elements of the plugin path, and write permissions to where I want to create the symlink. I've also tried copying the plugins to the firefox plugins directory, but firefox still doesn't register them. Curiously (or not?), I don't have this problem if I use the firefox version from Debian. It's just 'getfirefox'. I don't want to use the Debian version, though, or another browser. I may use Iceweasel from unstable as a last resort, but I really shouldn't be having this problem in the first place. Any clues? It's the first time I've used chroot, so if I am overlooking something simple, my apologies :) Thanks, Les -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: corrupted kernel module files with 2.6.18-3 on ext3
On Wed, 2006-12-20 at 05:35 -0800, Sal wrote: > You might want to run a memory test. I had similar problems that I > thought were being caused by a bad harddrive. It turned out to be > faulty memory. I tried that but my memory appears to be perfect... -s -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: openoffice.org-hyphenation-en package missing?
On Thu, Dec 21, 2006 at 12:19:01AM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > On Wed, Dec 20, 2006 at 02:56:45PM -0800, Andrew Sharp wrote: > > I thought I would ping the list to see if anyone knows why the > > openoffice.org-hyphenation-en* packages are missing from etch. They're > > in i386. In fact, only a handfull of the hyphenation packages are > > available on amd64. > > Those packages do not exist anymore, and have been removed because of > license problems. They do not exist on i386 anymore either, but it > could be you still have it installed from a time before it got removed. Doh, I forgot to check, that package is from sarge, which I don't have in my sources.list for amd64. Shoot. Cheers, a -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: openoffice.org-hyphenation-en package missing?
On Wed, Dec 20, 2006 at 02:56:45PM -0800, Andrew Sharp wrote: > I thought I would ping the list to see if anyone knows why the > openoffice.org-hyphenation-en* packages are missing from etch. They're > in i386. In fact, only a handfull of the hyphenation packages are > available on amd64. Those packages do not exist anymore, and have been removed because of license problems. They do not exist on i386 anymore either, but it could be you still have it installed from a time before it got removed. Kurt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
openoffice.org-hyphenation-en package missing?
I thought I would ping the list to see if anyone knows why the openoffice.org-hyphenation-en* packages are missing from etch. They're in i386. In fact, only a handfull of the hyphenation packages are available on amd64. Cheers, a -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Broadcom/Serverworks chipsets (was Re: a few simple questions about AMD64 version of Debian)
On Wednesday 20 December 2006 12:44 pm, Marco Maske wrote: > Has someone experience with k8 Broadcom/Serverworks chips? Excellent question. I'd be interested in hearing from people that have used/tried motherboards using this chipset. It appears to be the only other choice in server boards if once avoids nForce boards. -- Freddie Cash, LPIC-2 CCNT CCLP Network Support Technician School District 73 (250) 377-HELP [377-4357] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: a few simple questions about AMD64 version of Debian
Freddie Cash wrote: > I've spent the last three years doing absolutely everything possible to > avoid the nForce chipsets (which is getting increasingly harder to Yeah, I agree. > do). :) We don't have any servers running nVidia chipsets, I'm proud > to say (going all the way back to our dual-AthlonMP systems). They are > all AMD 8000-series and VIA chipsets. As such, we have had no > stability problems or driver issues running FreeBSD and Debian (32-bit > and 64-bit versions). It's too bad AMD stopped producing their own > chipsets, they were some very nice server chipsets. I like the AMD 8000-series chipset, too. Not only for server. My Thunder K8W is my rockstable workstation here. And the Tyan Websites, full of tested hardware, are very usefull. Has someone experience with k8 Broadcom/Serverworks chips? Ciao Marco! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: corrupted kernel module files with 2.6.18-3 on ext3
On Wed, 2006-12-20 at 18:08 +0100, Gudjon I. Gudjonsson wrote: > Sorry, I may be wrong but is it possible that you have installed libattr1 > 2.4.35? The problems seem similar to the problems I saw on my computers a > few days ago. The problem has been fixed with an emergency release of > libattr1. I track unstable on a daily basis. The version of libattr1 I have is 2.4.32-1.1 -- hopefully this is a good version! -s -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: corrupted kernel module files with 2.6.18-3 on ext3
Sorry, I may be wrong but is it possible that you have installed libattr1 2.4.35? The problems seem similar to the problems I saw on my computers a few days ago. The problem has been fixed with an emergency release of libattr1. /Gudjon Þann Miðvikudagur 20. desember 2006 17:50 skrifaði henk: > On Tuesday 19 December 2006 21:20, Stephen Olander Waters wrote: > > I've run into this weird filesystem and/or kernel problem where my > > kernel module files get corrupted (they live on my root partition). > > > > This is my root partition. To fix it (temporarily) I boot into rescue > > mode, shutdown networking and various daemons, unmount other > > filesystems, and issue "mount -o ro,remount /" to remount / readonly. I > > run fsck on it and it fixes the problems, though sometimes the modules > > are deleted and I have to reinstall the kernel package. > > > > Has anyone else noticed this? Should I just file a debian bug and > > forget about it or should I report it to the ext3 maintainers or...? > > At work I have a sid i386 with the same sort of problem. > ls works, ls -l gives an error message. > On top of that I can't login into KDE, can't open new files with KDE > programs under gnome. > I can still work with the box, but it is sub-optimal. > Didn't have the time to look into it, but yes i have noticed it. > > Mzzl > Henk
Re: a few simple questions about AMD64 version of Debian
On Tue, Dec 19, 2006 at 11:39:16AM -0800, Freddie Cash wrote: > I've spent the last three years doing absolutely everything possible to > avoid the nForce chipsets (which is getting increasingly harder to > do). :) We don't have any servers running nVidia chipsets, I'm proud to > say (going all the way back to our dual-AthlonMP systems). They are all > AMD 8000-series and VIA chipsets. As such, we have had no stability > problems or driver issues running FreeBSD and Debian (32-bit and 64-bit > versions). It's too bad AMD stopped producing their own chipsets, they > were some very nice server chipsets. > > Hopefully the merger with ATi means they'll be making new chipsets, and > not just gamer/pro-sumer chipsets, but real, server-class chipsets. > > We have just this school year introduced client systems running nForce > (don't remember if its nForce3 or nForce4) chipsets, and that was only so > we could get proper 3D support for our Linux diskless clients without > needing a separate video card (these are tiny boxes, and we're trying to > limit the power requirements). Well having not dealt with server boards, only desktop boards, I certainly will take an nforce chipset any day. I won't use an ATI one though. VIA is generally fine, and AMD I just haven't seen on desktop boards much, although I seem to recall some AGP or USB problem or such on one of their k7 chipsets, which they were very hard to convince to release the workaround for without an NDA which made life hard for the linux developers. I haven't really considered AMD chipsets as a result. They just seemed uncooporative at the time. I suspect that may have changed though since they seem very linux friendly in general now. -- Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: corrupted kernel module files with 2.6.18-3 on ext3
On Tuesday 19 December 2006 21:20, Stephen Olander Waters wrote: > I've run into this weird filesystem and/or kernel problem where my > kernel module files get corrupted (they live on my root partition). > > This is my root partition. To fix it (temporarily) I boot into rescue > mode, shutdown networking and various daemons, unmount other > filesystems, and issue "mount -o ro,remount /" to remount / readonly. I > run fsck on it and it fixes the problems, though sometimes the modules > are deleted and I have to reinstall the kernel package. > > Has anyone else noticed this? Should I just file a debian bug and > forget about it or should I report it to the ext3 maintainers or...? At work I have a sid i386 with the same sort of problem. ls works, ls -l gives an error message. On top of that I can't login into KDE, can't open new files with KDE programs under gnome. I can still work with the box, but it is sub-optimal. Didn't have the time to look into it, but yes i have noticed it. Mzzl Henk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: corrupted kernel module files with 2.6.18-3 on ext3
You might want to run a memory test. I had similar problems that I
thought were being caused by a bad harddrive. It turned out to be
faulty memory.
Stephen Olander Waters wrote:
> I've run into this weird filesystem and/or kernel problem where my
> kernel module files get corrupted (they live on my root partition).
>
> I shutdown my box every day with "shutdown -h now". Every now and then,
> when I restart, some modules (e.g., ALSA) won't have loaded. I do an "ls
> -l" in the module directory, and there are question marks ("?") instead
> of file size, instead of some file names, etc.
>
> This is my root partition. To fix it (temporarily) I boot into rescue
> mode, shutdown networking and various daemons, unmount other
> filesystems, and issue "mount -o ro,remount /" to remount / readonly. I
> run fsck on it and it fixes the problems, though sometimes the modules
> are deleted and I have to reinstall the kernel package.
>
> I've run a badblocks test and smart tests on my drive and it appears
> fine, so I think the problem must be a kernel module or filesystem bug.
>
> Has anyone else noticed this? Should I just file a debian bug and
> forget about it or should I report it to the ext3 maintainers or...?
>
> Hardware: Dual Opteron 244 on MSI K8T Master2-FAR (Via K8T8000 chipset).
> 2GB RAM.
>
> Kernel: linux-image-2.6.18-3-amd64 (Debian unstable version)
>
>
> # /etc/fstab: static file system information.
> #
> #
> /dev/hda1 /boot ext3 defaults 0 2
> /dev/hda2 /x86 ext3 defaults 0 2
> /dev/hda3 / ext3 defaults,errors=remount-ro 0 1
> /dev/hda4 /home ext3 defaults 0 2
> /dev/hdc /ls120 ext2 defaults,user 0 0
> /dev/hdc /floppy vfat defaults,user 0 0
> /dev/cdrom /cdrom iso9660 user,ro 0 0
> proc/proc proc defaults 0 0
> sysfs /sys sysfs none 0 0
> devpts /dev/pts devpts none 0 0
> tmpfs /dev/shm tmpfs defaults 0 0
> tmpfs /tmp tmpfs defaults 0 0
>
> # x86 mounts
> /home /x86/home none bind0 0
> /tmp/x86/tmp none bind0 0
> /dev/x86/dev none rbind0 0
> /sys /x86/sys none bind0 0
> proc/x86/proc proc defaults0 0
>
>
>
> Thanks for any help, suggestions, etc.
> -s
>
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
