Re: Bug#247743: SPARCstation 5 and 20040505 daily businesscard image
On Fri, May 07, 2004 at 02:25:10PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > I've asked James to copy 0.080 to testing for sparc. I don't have a > beta4 update planned at this time. Can someone give me some text to add > to the errata. * 2.4.24 kernels are no longer available for the SPARC architecture, only 2.4.26. The kernel installer in beta 4 hence chooses the wrong 2.4.26 kernel for 32-bit SPARC architectures. (Yes, so: only sparc32 is affected, since UP sparc64s may run SMP kernels with no issue. I choose to hide an explanation of the poor treatment for subarches that pick_kernel has.) -- Joshua Kwan signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#247743: FWD: Re: Bug#247743: SPARCstation 5 and 20040505 daily businesscard image
- Forwarded message from Joshua Kwan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - From: Joshua Kwan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Fri, 07 May 2004 09:17:24 -0700 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Bug#247743: SPARCstation 5 and 20040505 daily businesscard image User-Agent: Pan/0.14.2.91 (As She Crawled Across the Table (Debian GNU/Linux)) [ Again, no mailserver available, could a kind person please bounce this to the appropriate place in the BTS... Thanks :) ] On Thu, 06 May 2004 13:08:29 -0600, Peter Karbaliotis wrote: > Install base system failed because the installer chose the wrong kernel: > kernel-image-2.4.24-sparc64-smp instead of kernel-image-2.4.24-sparc32. > I was not prompted for a kernel to install. This has nothing to do with CPU detection, but because 2.4.26 made it into testing right after beta4, 2.4.24 got removed because it was no longer building from source in unstable. Hence the default behavior of pick_kernel ensues, which chooses the first kernel available. Sadly, this default behavior doesn't play nice with subarchitectures. I told Joey earlier that a base-installer with that bug fixed should get uploaded for a beta4 update, which I'm not sure is going to happen.. -- Joshua Kwan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] - End forwarded message - -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#247743: SPARCstation 5 and 20040505 daily businesscard image
Joshua Kwan wrote: > I told Joey earlier that a base-installer with that bug fixed should get > uploaded for a beta4 update, which I'm not sure is going to happen.. I've asked James to copy 0.080 to testing for sparc. I don't have a beta4 update planned at this time. Can someone give me some text to add to the errata. (Mail bouced to bts, btw.) -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#247743: SPARCstation 5 and 20040505 daily businesscard image
[ Again, no mailserver available, could a kind person please bounce this to the appropriate place in the BTS... Thanks :) ] On Thu, 06 May 2004 13:08:29 -0600, Peter Karbaliotis wrote: > Install base system failed because the installer chose the wrong kernel: > kernel-image-2.4.24-sparc64-smp instead of kernel-image-2.4.24-sparc32. > I was not prompted for a kernel to install. This has nothing to do with CPU detection, but because 2.4.26 made it into testing right after beta4, 2.4.24 got removed because it was no longer building from source in unstable. Hence the default behavior of pick_kernel ensues, which chooses the first kernel available. Sadly, this default behavior doesn't play nice with subarchitectures. I told Joey earlier that a base-installer with that bug fixed should get uploaded for a beta4 update, which I'm not sure is going to happen.. -- Joshua Kwan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
