Bug#323999: Dangling Symlink in /lib/modules/2.6.8-2-386/source in kernel-image-2.6.8-16
On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 10:53:50AM -0700, Allyn, MarkX A wrote: > Package: kernel-image-2.6.8-i386 > Version: 2.6.8-16 > > There is a symbolic link at /lib/modules/2.6.8-2-386/source > which points to someone's home directory (horms). The horms > home directory does not exist on a new installation. > > This is in the stable (Sarge) release. Thanks, I'll take a look into fixing it and get it in the next Sarge update. Incidently, that link isn't used for anything much, so it shouldn't do much harm. -- Horms -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#323570: kernel-source-2.4.27: Build fails with default gcc 4.0
On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 02:59:05PM +0100, George B. wrote: > On 8/19/05, Horms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 01:05:10PM +0100, George B. wrote: > > > On 8/18/05, Horms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, it should do just that. > > > > > > Sorry, which one? Automatically use gcc-3.3, or default to gcc-4.0? > > > > Sorry for being unclear. If you build kernel-source-2.4.27 2.4.27-11 > > then it should use gcc-3.3 for the build, even if your default > > gcc is gcc-4.0. To be more specific, if you inspect the makefile > > you will see that it actually sets the compiler to be gcc-3.3, > > rather than gcc. > > > > Of course if you use a different Makefile, say to build > > out of tree modules, or force the compiler to something else, > > this system breaks down. I'm not sure there is a good solution to > > that problem. But unpacking the kernel-source tar ball and doing > > a build should work as long as you have gcc-3.3 installed, > > which is a recomendation of the package. > > Well, if it fails when building a module I will just go and bug the > maintaner for that module source. ;-) Thats pretty much what I was thinking needs to happen. Lets see how it goes. -- Horms -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#324008: marked as done (Fails to compile with gcc 4.0)
Your message dated Sat, 20 Aug 2005 15:17:30 +0900 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#324008: Fails to compile with gcc 4.0 has caused the attached Bug report 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 I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 19 Aug 2005 18:54:56 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Aug 19 11:54:56 2005 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from mail.gmx.de (mail.gmx.net) [213.165.64.20] by spohr.debian.org with smtp (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian)) id 1E6C11-0005lI-00; Fri, 19 Aug 2005 11:54:55 -0700 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 19 Aug 2005 18:54:24 - Received: from ppp-82-135-76-153.mnet-online.de (EHLO localhost.localdomain) [82.135.76.153] by mail.gmx.net (mp028) with SMTP; 19 Aug 2005 20:54:24 +0200 X-Authenticated: #7657683 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=[127.0.0.1] ident=zgjryf) by localhost.localdomain with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1E6C0U-0005LX-4p for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fri, 19 Aug 2005 20:54:22 +0200 Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 20:54:19 +0200 From: Holger Jaekel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050602) X-Accept-Language: de-DE, de, en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Fails to compile with gcc 4.0 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.91.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 Package: kernel-source-2.6.8 Version: 2.6.8-16 Building kernel 2.6.8 with gcc 4.0.1 gives an error. Package dependencies should be changed. make[1]: Entering directory `/usr/src/kernel-source-2.6.8' HOSTCC scripts/kconfig/mconf.o scripts/kconfig/mconf.c:91: error: static declaration of 'current_menu' follows non-static declaration scripts/kconfig/lkc.h:63: error: previous declaration of 'current_menu' was here make[2]: *** [scripts/kconfig/mconf.o] Error 1 -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing'), (500, 'stable') Architecture: i386 (i686) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.8 Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1968) Versions of packages kernel-source-2.6.8 depends on: ii binutils 2.16.1-2 The GNU assembler, linker and bina ii bzip2 1.0.2-8high-quality block-sorting file co ii coreutils [fileutils] 5.2.1-2The GNU core utilities Versions of packages kernel-source-2.6.8 recommends: ii gcc 4:4.0.1-3The GNU C compiler ii libc6-dev [libc-dev]2.3.2.ds1-22 GNU C Library: Development Librari ii make3.80-9 The GNU version of the "make" util -- no debconf information -- Holger Jaekel, Westenstraße 26A, D-85757 Karlsfeld Tel.: +49-8131-617544 Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Received: (at 324008-done) by bugs.debian.org; 20 Aug 2005 06:33:43 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Aug 19 23:33:43 2005 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from koto.vergenet.net [210.128.90.7] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian)) id 1E6MvH-000730-00; Fri, 19 Aug 2005 23:33:43 -0700 Received: by koto.vergenet.net (Postfix, from userid 7100) id 7ECBC34038; Sat, 20 Aug 2005 15:33:41 +0900 (JST) Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 15:17:30 +0900 From: Horms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Bug#324008: Fails to compile with gcc 4.0 Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> X-Cluestick: seven User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.10i Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 08:54:19PM +0200, Holger Jaekel wrote: > Package: kernel-source-2.6.8 > Version: 2.6.8-16 > > Building kernel 2.6.8 with gcc 4.0.1 gives an error. Pack
Bug#319986: linux-image-2.6.12-1-powerpc64 continues to fail on PowerMac7,3
retitle 319986 linux-image-2.6.12-1-powerpc64 fails on dual G5 PowerMac7,3 stop Hi Sven, I tested the new linux image on a dual G5 PowerMac7,3 and it fails in a similar fashion as kernel-image-2.6.12-sven64 did. Let me know if I can provide you more information etc or otherwise help out. Cheers! Shyamal PS: Aargh...got to learn this new version stuff on bugs.d.o -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#323757: unsubscribe
-Mensaje original- De: Barry Hawkins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Enviado el: Viernes, 19 de Agosto de 2005 05:41 p.m. Para: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Asunto: Bug#323757: Similar build failure across multiple modules -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 To further confirm this bug, I can report that the same type of failure occurs when building ieee80211-source, ipw2200-source, and thinkpad-source. Regards, - -- Barry Hawkins All Things Computed site: www.alltc.com weblog: www.yepthatsme.com Registered Linux User #368650 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFDBkPFHuKcDICy0QoRAmjRAJ9w0K9h3H+RQK/QNDx8P9MxU0HYZQCg8kAB 6ikmgusp3d3MWinrS5yn178= =NjQa -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- 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]
Re: Moving forward with the 2.4.27 and 2.6.8 kernels
* Norbert Tretkowski wrote: > * Horms wrote: > > 2. 2.6.8-16sarge1 for stable-security > > 3. 2.4.27-10sarge1 for stable-security > > Builds finished on alpha. http://people.debian.org/~nobse/kernel/alpha/sarge/ Norbert -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Secure-testing-team] Re: Moving forward with the 2.4.27 and 2.6.8 kernels
On Fri, 2005-08-19 at 14:00 -0600, dann frazier wrote: > On Fri, 2005-08-19 at 10:21 -0400, Andres Salomon wrote: > > On Fri, 2005-08-19 at 09:30 +0200, Norbert Tretkowski wrote: > > > * Horms wrote: > > > > 2. 2.6.8-16sarge1 for stable-security > > > > 3. 2.4.27-10sarge1 for stable-security > > > > > > > I can do sparc builds mid-next-week; probably not before then, unless > > someone can make (reasonably fast) hardware available to me. > > I've got a 2.6.8 going on a slow sparc - I predict it will be done in > 2-3 days. Changes are committed. Frans Pop hooked me up w/ access to a faster sparc; build ETA greatly shortened. I should be able to get 2.4.27 done as well. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#323757: Similar build failure across multiple modules
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 To further confirm this bug, I can report that the same type of failure occurs when building ieee80211-source, ipw2200-source, and thinkpad-source. Regards, - -- Barry Hawkins All Things Computed site: www.alltc.com weblog: www.yepthatsme.com Registered Linux User #368650 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFDBkPFHuKcDICy0QoRAmjRAJ9w0K9h3H+RQK/QNDx8P9MxU0HYZQCg8kAB 6ikmgusp3d3MWinrS5yn178= =NjQa -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Secure-testing-team] Re: Moving forward with the 2.4.27 and 2.6.8 kernels
On Fri, 2005-08-19 at 10:21 -0400, Andres Salomon wrote: > On Fri, 2005-08-19 at 09:30 +0200, Norbert Tretkowski wrote: > > * Horms wrote: > > > 2. 2.6.8-16sarge1 for stable-security > > > 3. 2.4.27-10sarge1 for stable-security > > > > I can do sparc builds mid-next-week; probably not before then, unless > someone can make (reasonably fast) hardware available to me. I've got a 2.6.8 going on a slow sparc - I predict it will be done in 2-3 days. Changes are committed. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#324008: Fails to compile with gcc 4.0
* Holger Jaekel wrote: > Building kernel 2.6.8 with gcc 4.0.1 gives an error. Package > dependencies should be changed. 2.6.8 is already marked for removal from unstable. Please use 2.6.12, which works fine with gcc 4.0. Thanks, Norbert -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#322723: #322723 D-I: 'id route add' fails w/ "Network is unreachable"
On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 12:56:34AM +0200, Frans Pop wrote: > - the problem is still there if the new linux-image-2.6.12-1-386 > (2.6.12-5) kernel is used in the installer - the problem is not there in the 686 image. Bastian -- Warp 7 -- It's a law we can live with. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#324008: Fails to compile with gcc 4.0
Package: kernel-source-2.6.8 Version: 2.6.8-16 Building kernel 2.6.8 with gcc 4.0.1 gives an error. Package dependencies should be changed. make[1]: Entering directory `/usr/src/kernel-source-2.6.8' HOSTCC scripts/kconfig/mconf.o scripts/kconfig/mconf.c:91: error: static declaration of 'current_menu' follows non-static declaration scripts/kconfig/lkc.h:63: error: previous declaration of 'current_menu' was here make[2]: *** [scripts/kconfig/mconf.o] Error 1 -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing'), (500, 'stable') Architecture: i386 (i686) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.8 Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1968) Versions of packages kernel-source-2.6.8 depends on: ii binutils 2.16.1-2 The GNU assembler, linker and bina ii bzip2 1.0.2-8high-quality block-sorting file co ii coreutils [fileutils] 5.2.1-2The GNU core utilities Versions of packages kernel-source-2.6.8 recommends: ii gcc 4:4.0.1-3The GNU C compiler ii libc6-dev [libc-dev]2.3.2.ds1-22 GNU C Library: Development Librari ii make3.80-9 The GNU version of the "make" util -- no debconf information -- Holger Jaekel, Westenstraße 26A, D-85757 Karlsfeld Tel.: +49-8131-617544 Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#323999: Dangling Symlink in /lib/modules/2.6.8-2-386/source in kernel-image-2.6.8-16
Package: kernel-image-2.6.8-i386 Version: 2.6.8-16 There is a symbolic link at /lib/modules/2.6.8-2-386/source which points to someone's home directory (horms). The horms home directory does not exist on a new installation. This is in the stable (Sarge) release. Mark Allyn
Re: Bug#323183: Please remove some linux packages from sid
On Fri, 2005-08-19 at 11:30 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote: > On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 05:37:38PM -0600, dann frazier wrote: > > kernel-latest-2.6-i386 provides: > > kernel-image-2.6-386_101_i386.deb > > linux-2.6 provides: > > kernel-image-2.6-386_2.6.12-5_i386.deb > > 2.6.12-5 < 101, so an upgrade won't take place (unless I'm missing > > something..) > > No, 1:2.6.12-1 > 101 Ah - I missed the introduction of the epoch commit; that solves it. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: compiling 2.6.12 with the debian patch
On Fri, 2005-08-19 at 16:36 +0300, Teemu Ikonen wrote: > Hi all, > > For a few recent versions of the Debian patch I've been getting the > following when trying to compile the 2.6.12 kernel > (linux-source-2.6.12-5) with > "make-kpkg --added-patches debian kernel_image": > > test -f applied_patches && rm -f applied_patches > make: [stamp-debian] Error 1 (ignored) > for patch in /usr/src/kernel-patches/all/2.6.12/apply/debian ; do\ > if test -x $patch; then\ > if $patch; then \ > echo "Patch $patch processed fine"; \ > echo "$patch" >> applied_patches; \ > else \ >echo "Patch $patch failed."; \ >echo "Hit return to Continue"; \ >read ans; \ > fi; \ > fi; \ > done > E: Can't patch to nonexistent revision (wait until 2006) > Patch /usr/src/kernel-patches/all/2.6.12/apply/debian failed. > Hit return to Continue The linux-source tarball already contains the debian patches. See http://wiki.debian.net/?DebianKernelTree and http://wiki.debian.net/?DebianKernelSource for details. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#323702: marked as done (linux-headers-2.6.12-1: recursive symlinks prevent module-assistant from building modules)
On Fri, 19 Aug 2005, Wouter Coekaerts wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 05:25:38PM -0400, Paul Kuliniewicz wrote: > > > Hmm. I purged the packages, deleted the cached .debs, and > > > re-installed, and now everything looks to be as it should be. I'm not > > > sure what had happened there. I think I had version -2 of the .deb and > > > then upgraded it to -5, but I don't remember for sure. > > > > > > Everything seems to be working now, so I guess you can close this bug. > > > > doing as requested. ;) > > No, this bug isn't fixed at all! There's just a workaround, which is > uninstalling and reinstalling the package. But (as far as I know) everyone > who follows unstable close enough and has this package and didn't apply > this workaround, still has the broken situation. > It would be nice if a next version would repair that situation somehow... that's why it is called unstable. > I don't know anything about how symlinks are supposed to be handled > in .debs, but as long as nobody can point out what was done wrong in the > packaging of linux-headers-2.6.12-1, this could just as well concidered a > bug in dpkg, as it looks like it handled this upgrade wrong. > > Wouter. whatever, feel free to reopen. sorry i do not care, please drop me of cc. -- maks -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Secure-testing-team] Re: Moving forward with the 2.4.27 and 2.6.8 kernels
On Fri, 2005-08-19 at 09:30 +0200, Norbert Tretkowski wrote: > * Horms wrote: > > 2. 2.6.8-16sarge1 for stable-security > > 3. 2.4.27-10sarge1 for stable-security > I can do sparc builds mid-next-week; probably not before then, unless someone can make (reasonably fast) hardware available to me. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#323570: kernel-source-2.4.27: Build fails with default gcc 4.0
On 8/19/05, Horms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 01:05:10PM +0100, George B. wrote: > > On 8/18/05, Horms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Yes, it should do just that. > > > > Sorry, which one? Automatically use gcc-3.3, or default to gcc-4.0? > > Sorry for being unclear. If you build kernel-source-2.4.27 2.4.27-11 > then it should use gcc-3.3 for the build, even if your default > gcc is gcc-4.0. To be more specific, if you inspect the makefile > you will see that it actually sets the compiler to be gcc-3.3, > rather than gcc. > > Of course if you use a different Makefile, say to build > out of tree modules, or force the compiler to something else, > this system breaks down. I'm not sure there is a good solution to > that problem. But unpacking the kernel-source tar ball and doing > a build should work as long as you have gcc-3.3 installed, > which is a recomendation of the package. Well, if it fails when building a module I will just go and bug the maintaner for that module source. ;-) Thanks for your help. George.
Bug#317286: Processed: Re: Bug#317286: Please backport support for Promise SATAII TX2/TX4 cards (from 2.6.11)
I have tried the patched kernel, and although it was able to compile, it did not work correctly. The kernel detects all four ports on the promise card, detects the drives correctly, and even sees the partition tables. However, it soon gets serious errors and disables the controller. I built this kernel myself using your patches. I also tried to use the pre-built ones, but could not as my root filesystem is raid5 and the pre-built kernels did not have that support enabled. Some info about the system I'm testing with: AMD Sempron 2600+ Asus mainboard with a VIA K8T800 chipset There are also 2 onboard VIA sata controllers with the same 250GB disks attached to them. They are detected as sde and sdf. Here is an lspci: :00:00.0 Host bridge: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT8385 [K8T800 AGP] Host Bridge (rev 01) :00:01.0 PCI bridge: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT8237 PCI bridge [K8T800 South] :00:0a.0 Ethernet controller: Marvell Technology Group Ltd. Yukon Gigabit Ethernet 10/100/1000Base-T Adapter (rev 13) :00:0b.0 VGA compatible controller: ATI Technologies Inc 264VT [Mach64 VT] (rev 40) :00:0c.0 Unknown mass storage controller: Promise Technology, Inc.: Unknown device 3d18 (rev 02) :00:0f.0 RAID bus controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. VIA VT6420 SATA RAID Controller (rev 80) :00:0f.1 IDE interface: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT82C586A/B/VT82C686/A/B/VT823x/A/C PIPC Bus Master IDE (rev 06) :00:10.0 USB Controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT82x UHCI USB 1.1 Controller (rev 81) :00:10.1 USB Controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT82x UHCI USB 1.1 Controller (rev 81) :00:10.2 USB Controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT82x UHCI USB 1.1 Controller (rev 81) :00:10.4 USB Controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. USB 2.0 (rev 86) :00:11.0 ISA bridge: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT8237 ISA bridge [K8T800 South] :00:18.0 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] K8 NorthBridge :00:18.1 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] K8 NorthBridge :00:18.2 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] K8 NorthBridge :00:18.3 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] K8 NorthBridge I've typed up the relevant portions of the boot messages and attached them to this message. I'll gladly do more testing or provide further info if needed. Please advise. Thanks Relevant boot messages: -- ata1: SATA max UDMA/133 cmd 0xF8C9E200 ctl 0xF8C9E238 bmdma 0x0 irq 17 ata2: SATA max UDMA/133 cmd 0xF8C9E280 ctl 0xF8C9E2B8 bmdma 0x0 irq 17 ata3: SATA max UDMA/133 cmd 0xF8C9E300 ctl 0xF8C9E338 bmdma 0x0 irq 17 ata4: SATA max UDMA/133 cmd 0xF8C9E380 ctl 0xF8C9E3B8 bmdma 0x0 irq 17 ata1: dev 0 ATA, max UDMA/133, 488397168 sectors: lba48 ata1: dev 0 configured for UDMA/133 scsi0 : sata_promise ata2: dev 0 ATA, max UDMA/133, 488397168 sectors: lba48 ata2: dev 0 configured for UDMA/133 scsi1 : sata_promise ata3: dev 0 ATA, max UDMA/133, 488397168 sectors: lba48 ata3: dev 0 configured for UDMA/133 scsi2 : sata_promise ata4: dev 0 ATA, max UDMA/133, 488397168 sectors: lba48 ata4: dev 0 configured for UDMA/133 scsi3 : sata_promise Vendor: ATA Model: ST3250823AS Rev: 3.02 Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 05 Vendor: ATA Model: ST3250823AS Rev: 3.02 Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 05 Vendor: ATA Model: ST3250823AS Rev: 3.02 Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 05 Vendor: ATA Model: ST3250823AS Rev: 3.02 Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 05 -- SCSI device sda: 488397168 512-byte hdwr sectors (250059 MB) SCSI device sda: drive cache: write back sda: sda1 sda2 sda3 Attached scsi disk sda at scsi0, channel 0, id 0, lun 0 SCSI device sdb: 488397168 512-byte hdwr sectors (250059 MB) SCSI device sdb: drive cache: write back SCSI device sdb: 488397168 512-byte hdwr sectors (250059 MB) SCSI device sdb: drive cache: write back sdb: sdb1 sdb2 sdb3 Attached scsi disk sdb at scsi1, channel 0, id 0, lun 0 SCSI device sdc: 488397168 512-byte hdwr sectors (250059 MB) SCSI device sdc: drive cache: write back SCSI device sdc: 488397168 512-byte hdwr sectors (250059 MB) SCSI device sdc: drive cache: write back sdc: sdc1 sdc2 sdc3 Attached scsi disk sdc at scsi2, channel 0, id 0, lun 0 SCSI device sdd: 488397168 512-byte hdwr sectors (250059 MB) SCSI device sdd: drive cache: write back SCSI device sdd: 488397168 512-byte hdwr sectors (250059 MB) SCSI device sdd: drive cache: write back sdd: sdd1 sdd2 sdd3 Attached scsi disk sdd at scsi3, channel 0, id 0, lun 0 - irq 17: nobody cared! [<#>] (lots of messages here I didnt type in) Disabling irq 17 ata1: DMA Timeout SCSI0: ERROR on channel 0, id 0, lun 0, CDB: 0x28 00 00 03 2F 3F 00 00 08 00 Current sda: sens
compiling 2.6.12 with the debian patch
Hi all, For a few recent versions of the Debian patch I've been getting the following when trying to compile the 2.6.12 kernel (linux-source-2.6.12-5) with "make-kpkg --added-patches debian kernel_image": test -f applied_patches && rm -f applied_patches make: [stamp-debian] Error 1 (ignored) for patch in /usr/src/kernel-patches/all/2.6.12/apply/debian ; do\ if test -x $patch; then\ if $patch; then \ echo "Patch $patch processed fine"; \ echo "$patch" >> applied_patches; \ else \ echo "Patch $patch failed."; \ echo "Hit return to Continue"; \ read ans; \ fi; \ fi; \ done E: Can't patch to nonexistent revision (wait until 2006) Patch /usr/src/kernel-patches/all/2.6.12/apply/debian failed. Hit return to Continue Am I just dense, or is there a bug somewhere? Without the debian patch, compiling works fine. Teemu
Processed: submitter
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > submitter 281275 Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bug#281275: Deadlocks on PCMCIA insert Changed Bug submitter from Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > submitter 281360 Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bug#281360: pppconfig: ip-up.d/0dns-up, ip-down.d/0dns-down: Should restart nscd Changed Bug submitter from Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > submitter 291197 Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bug#291197: "command -v" prints pathnames of non-executable files Changed Bug submitter from Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > submitter 291580 Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bug#291580: update-modules uses "local" and therefore fails under posh Changed Bug submitter from Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > submitter 292343 Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bug#292343: scrollkeeper directory in /usr/var/ Changed Bug submitter from Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > submitter 292751 Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bug#292751: bash man page does not mention that "command -v" prints names of builtins and functions too Changed Bug submitter from Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > submitter 294378 Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bug#294378: Composer suddenly consumes all memory and crashes Changed Bug submitter from Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > submitter 299205 Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bug#299205: Backup files in blacklist.d not ignored Changed Bug submitter from Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > submitter 302583 Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bug#302583: Please supply zeroconf man page Changed Bug submitter from Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > submitter 302658 Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bug#302658: Does not obtain lease Changed Bug submitter from Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > submitter 309454 Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bug#309454: GtkDeprecationWarning Changed Bug submitter from Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > submitter 313369 Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bug#313369: RFH: mwavem -- Mwave/ACP modem support software Changed Bug submitter from Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > submitter 314949 Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bug#314949: Prints error message if system hostname cannot be resolved Changed Bug submitter from Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > submitter 317007 Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bug#317007: Please Recommend "alsa" Changed Bug submitter from Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > submitter 317749 Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bug#317749: Network Interfaces: Please support multiple logical interfaces and mapping Changed Bug submitter from Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > submitter 317919 Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bug#317919: Does not ignore hidden symlinks Changed Bug submitter from Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > submitter 318568 Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bug#318568: Doesn't restore symlinks correctly for startup-and-shutdown scripts Changed Bug submitter from Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > submitter 113146 Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bug#113146: mount: man page gives wrong default perms for iso9660 Changed Bug submitter from Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > submitter 279631 Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bug#279631: TUTORIAL: typo Changed Bug submitter from Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > submitter 292967 Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bug#292967: doc-base preinst and prerm use "command -v" with #!/bin/sh Changed Bug submitter from Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > submitter 292977 Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bug#292977: fingerd.postrm is a #!/bin/sh script but uses command -v Changed Bug submitter from Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > submitter 292994 Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bug#292994: linuxdoc-tools postinst and prerm are #!/bin/sh scripts but use command -v Changed Bug submitter from Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > submitter 292996 Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bug#292996: scm postinst and prerm are #!/bin/sh scripts but use command -v Changed Bug submitter from Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > submitter 293047 Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bug#293047: slip postinst and prerm are #!/bin/sh scripts but use command -v Changed Bug
Bug#323702: marked as done (linux-headers-2.6.12-1: recursive symlinks prevent module-assistant from building modules)
On Friday 19 August 2005 13:45, Wouter Coekaerts wrote: > I don't know anything about how symlinks are supposed to be handled > in .debs, but as long as nobody can point out what was done wrong in the > packaging of linux-headers-2.6.12-1, this could just as well concidered a > bug in dpkg, as it looks like it handled this upgrade wrong. (after a bit of googling which I should have done first) : From Debian Policy Manual , 6.5 Details of unpack phase of installation or upgrade: "A directory will never be replaced by a symbolic link to a directory or vice versa; instead, the existing state (symlink or not) will be left alone and dpkg will follow the symlink if there is one." So it is documented behaviour. And http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2004/07/msg00425.html suggests removing the symlink in preinst is what should be done. Wouter. pgp58Tduo6gOC.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#323702: marked as done (linux-headers-2.6.12-1: recursive symlinks prevent module-assistant from building modules)
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 05:25:38PM -0400, Paul Kuliniewicz wrote: > > Hmm. I purged the packages, deleted the cached .debs, and > > re-installed, and now everything looks to be as it should be. I'm not > > sure what had happened there. I think I had version -2 of the .deb and > > then upgraded it to -5, but I don't remember for sure. > > > > Everything seems to be working now, so I guess you can close this bug. > > doing as requested. ;) No, this bug isn't fixed at all! There's just a workaround, which is uninstalling and reinstalling the package. But (as far as I know) everyone who follows unstable close enough and has this package and didn't apply this workaround, still has the broken situation. It would be nice if a next version would repair that situation somehow... I don't know anything about how symlinks are supposed to be handled in .debs, but as long as nobody can point out what was done wrong in the packaging of linux-headers-2.6.12-1, this could just as well concidered a bug in dpkg, as it looks like it handled this upgrade wrong. Wouter. pgpEatEazJUDI.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Bug#323183: Please remove some linux packages from sid
On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 05:37:38PM -0600, dann frazier wrote: > kernel-latest-2.6-i386 provides: > kernel-image-2.6-386_101_i386.deb > linux-2.6 provides: > kernel-image-2.6-386_2.6.12-5_i386.deb > 2.6.12-5 < 101, so an upgrade won't take place (unless I'm missing > something..) No, 1:2.6.12-1 > 101 Bastian -- Where there's no emotion, there's no motive for violence. -- Spock, "Dagger of the Mind", stardate 2715.1 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Processed: Fix typo in bug title
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > retitle 322723 D-I: 'ip route add' fails w/ "Network is unreachable" Bug#322723: D-I: 'id route add' fails w/ "Network is unreachable" Changed Bug title. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#323702: marked as done (linux-headers-2.6.12-1: recursive symlinks prevent module-assistant from building modules)
Your message dated Fri, 19 Aug 2005 10:07:19 +0200 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#323702: linux-headers-2.6.12-1: recursive symlinks prevent module-assistant from building modules has caused the attached Bug report 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 I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 18 Aug 2005 00:08:56 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Aug 17 17:08:56 2005 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from mailhub246.itcs.purdue.edu [128.210.5.246] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian)) id 1E5Xxo-0008UY-00; Wed, 17 Aug 2005 17:08:56 -0700 Received: from kryten ([69.251.216.97]) (authenticated bits=0) by mailhub246.itcs.purdue.edu (8.13.4/8.13.4/avscan-smtp) with ESMTP id j7I08s0L030590 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 17 Aug 2005 19:08:55 -0500 Received: from paul by kryten with local (Exim 4.52) id 1E5Xxl-0002nX-09; Wed, 17 Aug 2005 20:08:53 -0400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Paul Kuliniewicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: linux-headers-2.6.12-1: recursive symlinks prevent module-assistant from building modules X-Mailer: reportbug 3.15 Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 20:08:52 -0400 Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> X-PMX-Version: 4.7.1.128075 X-PerlMx-Virus-Scanned: Yes Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 Package: linux-headers-2.6.12-1 Version: 2.6.12-5 Severity: normal -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 linux-headers-2.6.12-1 ships recursive symlinks in /usr/src/linux-headers-2.6.12-1/arch/i386, as shown: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/src/linux-headers-2.6.12-1/arch/i386$ ls -l total 56 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 49 Aug 17 18:47 Kconfig -> ../../../linux-headers-2.6.12-1/arch/i386/Kconfig lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 55 Aug 17 18:47 Kconfig.debug -> ../../../linux-headers-2.6.12-1/arch/i386/Kconfig.debug lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 50 Aug 17 18:47 Makefile -> ../../../linux-headers-2.6.12-1/arch/i386/Makefile drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 4096 Aug 17 18:47 boot drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Aug 17 18:47 crypto drwxr-xr-x 5 root root 4096 Aug 17 18:47 kernel drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Aug 17 18:47 lib drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Aug 17 18:47 mach-default drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Aug 17 18:47 mach-es7000 drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Aug 17 18:47 mach-generic drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Aug 17 18:47 mach-visws drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Aug 17 18:47 mach-voyager drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Aug 17 18:47 math-emu drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Aug 17 18:47 mm drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Aug 17 18:47 oprofile drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Aug 17 18:47 pci drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Aug 17 18:47 power linux-headers-2.6.12-1-686 has symlinks to these recursive symlinks: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/src/linux-headers-2.6.12-1-686/arch/i386$ ls -l total 56 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 49 Aug 17 18:47 Kconfig -> ../../../linux-headers-2.6.12-1/arch/i386/Kconfig lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 55 Aug 17 18:47 Kconfig.debug -> ../../../linux-headers-2.6.12-1/arch/i386/Kconfig.debug lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 50 Aug 17 18:47 Makefile -> ../../../linux-headers-2.6.12-1/arch/i386/Makefile drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 4096 Aug 17 18:47 boot drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Aug 17 18:47 crypto drwxr-xr-x 5 root root 4096 Aug 17 18:47 kernel drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Aug 17 18:47 lib drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Aug 17 18:47 mach-default drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Aug 17 18:47 mach-es7000 drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Aug 17 18:47 mach-generic drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Aug 17 18:47 mach-visws drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Aug 17 18:47 mach-voyager drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Aug 17 18:47 math-emu drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Aug 17 18:47 mm drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Aug 17 18:47 oprofile drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Aug 17 18:47 pci drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Aug 17 18:47 power When module-assistant tries to build a module for this kernel, the build fails because it tries to dereference this recursive symlink. Here's a build log from trying to build ieee80211-source; dh_testdir dh_testroot rm -f build-arch-stamp build-indep-stamp configure-sta
Re: Moving forward with the 2.4.27 and 2.6.8 kernels
* Horms wrote: > 2. 2.6.8-16sarge1 for stable-security > 3. 2.4.27-10sarge1 for stable-security Builds finished on alpha. Norbert -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
