Bug#383403: marked as done (linux-2.6: includes nondistributable and non-free binary firmware)
Your message dated Thu, 17 Aug 2006 09:11:58 +0200 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#383403: linux-2.6: includes nondistributable and non-free binary firmware 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) --- Begin Message --- Package: linux-2.6 Severity: serious Justification: Policy 2.1 The following 59 files, found in Debian's linux-2.6_2.6.17.orig.tar.gz, apparently contain software in binary form, for which Debian has no corresponding source code. Debian policy states that "The program must include source code, and must allow distribution in source code as well as compiled form." Therefore Debian must not distribute these files. drivers/atm/atmsar11.data drivers/atm/pca200e.data drivers/atm/pca200e_ecd.data drivers/atm/sba200e_ecd.data drivers/char/drm/mga_ucode.h drivers/char/drm/r128_cce.c drivers/char/drm/radeon_cp.c drivers/char/dsp56k.c drivers/char/ip2/fip_firm.h drivers/media/dvb/ttpci/av7110_hw.c drivers/media/dvb/ttusb-budget/dvb-ttusb-dspbootcode.h drivers/media/video/usbvideo/vicam.c drivers/net/appletalk/cops_ffdrv.h drivers/net/appletalk/cops_ltdrv.h drivers/net/bnx2_fw.h drivers/net/cassini.h drivers/net/e100.c drivers/net/hamradio/yam1200.h drivers/net/hamradio/yam9600.h drivers/net/myri_code.h drivers/net/pcmcia/ositech.h drivers/net/starfire_firmware.h drivers/net/tg3.c drivers/net/tokenring/3c359_microcode.h drivers/net/typhoon-firmware.h drivers/scsi/advansys.c drivers/scsi/ql1040_fw.h drivers/scsi/ql12160_fw.h drivers/scsi/ql1280_fw.h drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/ql2100_fw.c drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/ql2200_fw.c drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/ql2300_fw.c drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/ql2322_fw.c drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/ql2400_fw.c drivers/scsi/qlogicpti_asm.c drivers/usb/misc/emi26_fw.h drivers/usb/net/kawethfw.h drivers/usb/serial/io_fw_boot2.h drivers/usb/serial/io_fw_boot.h drivers/usb/serial/io_fw_down2.h drivers/usb/serial/io_fw_down3.h drivers/usb/serial/io_fw_down.h drivers/usb/serial/ti_fw_3410.h drivers/usb/serial/ti_fw_5052.h drivers/usb/serial/whiteheat_fw.h sound/isa/sb/sb16/sb16_csp_codecs.h sound/isa/wavefront/wavefront_fx.c sound/oss/maestro3.h sound/oss/ymfpci_image.h sound/oss/yss225.c sound/pci/cs46xx/cs46xx_image.h sound/pci/cs46xx/imgs/cwc4630.h sound/pci/cs46xx/imgs/cwcasync.h sound/pci/cs46xx/imgs/cwcdma.h sound/pci/cs46xx/imgs/cwcemb80.h sound/pci/cs46xx/imgs/cwcsnoop.h sound/pci/korg1212/korg1212-firmware.h sound/pci/maestro3.c sound/pci/ymfpci/ymfpci_image.h This list is probably not perfect. Corrections are welcome. Additional information is posted at http://doolittle.icarus.com/~larry/fwinventory/2.6.17.html -- System Information: deleted (irrelevant) --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 05:17:34PM -0700, Larry Doolittle wrote: > Package: linux-2.6 > Severity: serious > Justification: Policy 2.1 how about if you check for duplicate bug reports! see #242866 for same style. > The following 59 files, found in Debian's linux-2.6_2.6.17.orig.tar.gz, > apparently contain software in binary form, for which Debian has no > corresponding source code. Debian policy states that "The program > must include source code, and must allow distribution in source code > as well as compiled form." Therefore Debian must not distribute these > files. you give zero prove that they are not register code, anyway closing due to the duplicate submission. -- maks --- End Message ---
Bug#383299: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686: 2.6.17-2 XFS error
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 11:05:15AM -0600, dann frazier wrote: > Frederik, > I see nothing in 2.6.17-6 that looks like it could reasonably cause > this - but there was an XFS corruption bug that was fixed in > 2.6.17-5. Did you ever mount this fs with an earlier 2.6.17 kernel? > > I would suggest forcing a run of xfs_repair on your fs, and retrying > 2.6.17-6. Please let us know how that works for you. Hello again, I have been following Unstable, so I suppose I have used earlier 2.6.17 kernels as well. When I ran xfs_repair on this and one other filesystem, some errors were found, so as you implied, the problem propably was a filesystem that hade been previously corrupted. I will keep running 2.6.17-6 and report back again if I run in to more problems. Feel free to close this bug as user error or something. Now I only have to find out "the Debian way" of getting a root shell before / is remounted read-write so I can check that filesystem as well... Thanks for your help /Fredrik -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Kernel schedule proposal for Etch
Frederik Schueler wrote: > Hello, > > we should finally agree on which kernel version we want to release etch > with, and on an appropriate timeframe. > > The goal should be obvious: release Etch on December, 4th. > > All kernel team members I asked so far would prefer a release with > 2.6.18, which is likely to be released upstream within the next 4 weeks. > The Debian installer team obviously would like as much time as possible > to find out and fix all emerging bugs. > > Trying to put both requirements together, the kernel release schedule > could look as follows: > > today: start migration of 2.6.17 kernel and udebs to testing > > 15.09: upload 2.6.18 to unstable [1] This is barely feasible. It would mean that the kernel team will have to spend the next month doing the work to make 2.6.18 DFSG-free. This could of course be done very quickly by stripping out all the problematic drivers, but this would probably be a very bad solution from the installer point of view. > 01.10: migrate 2.6.18 kernel and udebs to testing > > 04.11: freeze kernel - No more changes to the testing version. Start of >security support for the kernel on security.d.o [2] > > 04.12: release > > > I would like to keep the non-free firmware discussion as a separate topic, > thus it is not considerer in this schedule. That's simply unrealistic. Ignoring what amounts to about 50 RC bugs in designing a schedule is just stupid. > I'd like some feedback from both the installer and release team if they > think this is a feasible way for further action; if so, I'll also > contact the security team for begin of security support. > > Best regards > Frederik Schueler > > > [1] The 2.6.18 release obviously depends on the upstream schedule, but 4 > weeks from now is realistic considering the 2.6.18-rc4 status. > > [2] Kernel freeze as in: security fixes will go into a branch targeted > at security.d.o and proposed-updates. We won't touch the kernel in Etch > after the freeze, That means it *must* be DFSG-free. See above. For the smoothest results, the upload of a DFSG-free kernel (which is to say, a freezable kernel) should come after the installer is capable of loading non-free kernel modules from separate non-free udebs. So the design of a plausible kernel upload schedule is primarily dependent on non-free udeb support. Anyone know what the ETA for that is? > but for extreme security issues affecting the > installation process, like remote root exploits. All other issues will > be addressed as needed in a security update and future point releases. -- Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it. So why isn't he in prison yet?... -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#383299: marked as done (linux-image-2.6.17-2-686: 2.6.17-2 XFS error)
Your message dated Thu, 17 Aug 2006 11:57:58 +0200 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#383299: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686: 2.6.17-2 XFS error 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) --- Begin Message --- Package: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686 Version: 2.6.17-6 Severity: important After booting the kernel from linux-image-2.6.17-2 2.6.17-6 one of my xfs partitions stopped working (the system was idle at the time of the error). Dmesg contained the following error: Filesystem "hda3": XFS internal error xfs_trans_cancel at line 1150 of file fs/xfs/xfs_trans.c. Caller 0xd0933588 xfs_trans_cancel+0x4d/0xd6 [xfs] xfs_rename+0xa23/0xacf [xfs] xfs_rename+0xa23/0xacf [xfs] xfs_vn_rename+0x24/0x64 [xfs] xfs_iaccess+0x7c/0x146 [xfs] xfs_access+0x34/0x3a [xfs] xfs_vn_permission+0x0/0x13 [xfs] xfs_vn_permission+0xf/0x13 [xfs] kstrdup+0x23/0x42 vfs_rename+0x29c/0x3dc __lookup_hash+0x4a/0xc5 sys_renameat+0x155/0x1b9 sys_rename+0x11/0x15 sysenter_past_esp+0x54/0x75 xfs_force_shutdown(hda3,0x8) called from line 1151 of file fs/xfs/xfs_trans.c. Return address = 0xd0948200 Filesystem "hda3": Corruption of in-memory data detected. Shutting down filesystem: hda3 Please umount the filesystem, and rectify the problem(s) This computer has shown no problems for a long before booting this kernel. The computer contains a 1.7GHz P4 and 512MB memory. Also, I had the nvidia kernel module loaded.. After rebooting to linux-image-2.6.17-1 2.6.17-5 the filesystem seems to work with no problems again. Thanks /Fredrik -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable') Architecture: i386 (i686) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.17-1-686 Locale: LANG=sv_SE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=sv_SE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Versions of packages linux-image-2.6.17-2-686 depends on: ii module-init-tools 3.2.2-3tools for managing Linux kernel mo ii yaird [linux-initramfs-tool] 0.0.12-17 Yet Another mkInitRD Versions of packages linux-image-2.6.17-2-686 recommends: ii libc6-i6862.3.6-19 GNU C Library: Shared libraries [i -- debconf information: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/postinst/old-initrd-link-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/postinst/old-dir-initrd-link-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/preinst/lilo-initrd-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/preinst/failed-to-move-modules-2.6.17-2-686: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/postinst/really-run-bootloader-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/postinst/depmod-error-initrd-2.6.17-2-686: false linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/postinst/create-kimage-link-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/postinst/bootloader-test-error-2.6.17-2-686: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/preinst/lilo-has-ramdisk: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/prerm/removing-running-kernel-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/preinst/abort-overwrite-2.6.17-2-686: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/preinst/already-running-this-2.6.17-2-686: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/postinst/old-system-map-link-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/preinst/bootloader-initrd-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/preinst/initrd-2.6.17-2-686: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/preinst/abort-install-2.6.17-2-686: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/preinst/overwriting-modules-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/postinst/kimage-is-a-directory: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/preinst/elilo-initrd-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/prerm/would-invalidate-boot-loader-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/postinst/depmod-error-2.6.17-2-686: false linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/postinst/bootloader-error-2.6.17-2-686: --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 10:23:45AM +0200, Fredrik Olofsson wrote: > > > Feel free to close this bug as user error or something. by mailing to [EMAIL PROTECTED] that is done, doing as the xfs trouble happened earlier. > Now I only have to find out "the Debian way" of getting a root shell > before / is remounted read-write so I can check that filesystem as > well... boot into single user mode by either appending 1 or single on the boot line, kernel args are the same across distributions. best regards -- maks --- End Message ---
Re: Kernel schedule proposal for Etch
On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 05:17:18AM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote: > Frederik Schueler wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > we should finally agree on which kernel version we want to release etch > > with, and on an appropriate timeframe. > > > > The goal should be obvious: release Etch on December, 4th. > > > > All kernel team members I asked so far would prefer a release with > > 2.6.18, which is likely to be released upstream within the next 4 weeks. > > The Debian installer team obviously would like as much time as possible > > to find out and fix all emerging bugs. > > > > Trying to put both requirements together, the kernel release schedule > > could look as follows: > > > > today: start migration of 2.6.17 kernel and udebs to testing > > > > 15.09: upload 2.6.18 to unstable [1] > > This is barely feasible. It would mean that the kernel team will have to > spend the next month doing the work to make 2.6.18 DFSG-free. This could > of course be done very quickly by stripping out all the problematic drivers, > but this would probably be a very bad solution from the installer point of > view. Ah, i thought you proposed to help out with this, and not just complain about it ? But then, maybe i am wrong about this. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#383447: ACPI problem, hdb timed out
Package: linux-image-2.6.17-2-k7 Version: 2.6.17-6 Hello, After the last update yesterday of the kernel ( from 2.6.17-1 up to 2.6.17-2 ) I've get some problems. After many boots, I'm getting at the point, where the kernel initialiazes the HID driver, that my hdb timed out and lost his interrupt, then he tried to readdress him an interrupt, but that's not working. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Urgent : megaraid and qla2300 modules not found
Hello, I have 2 days to install debian etch on our production server. I download the last daily build of the cdrom (release debian-testing-ia64-netinstall.iso 20060815). But missing the driver megaraid legacy and qla2300 on the cdrom It's my last chance to migrate our redhat to debian could you help me by building a new daily build iso with these 2 modules or minimum with the megaraid_legacy ? Thanks in advance guy -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#381844: itramfs-tools doesn't produce working ramdisk on amd64 with MODULES=list
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006, Ivan Sergio Borgonovo wrote: > > this will be a mostly silent boot and the log is at > > /tmp/initramfs.debug > > attached hmm ok that shows that initramfs-tools set usage wasn't tested since longer with debug. cleaned that up for 0.74 so that we can get their a real long debug log. -- maks -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#383299: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686: 2.6.17-2 XFS error
On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 11:57:58AM +0200, maximilian attems wrote: > On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 10:23:45AM +0200, Fredrik Olofsson wrote: > > Now I only have to find out "the Debian way" of getting a root shell > > before / is remounted read-write so I can check that filesystem as > > well... > > boot into single user mode by either appending 1 or single > on the boot line, kernel args are the same across distributions. This does not work since all filesystems are mounted rw at the point where "single" stops. I solved it by using the kernel arg "ydebug" which yaird initramfs images looks for and halts just before switching to the real / filesystem. Again, thanks for the help /Fredrik -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: linux-2.6 suffers from the same nvidia problem
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > clone 383465 -1 Bug#383465: Contains obfuscated source code, DFSG violation? Bug 383465 cloned as bug 383481. > reassign -1 linux-2.6 Bug#383481: Contains obfuscated source code, DFSG violation? Bug reassigned from package `xserver-xorg-video-nv' to `linux-2.6'. > retitle -1 nvidiafb is not in the preferred form of modification either Bug#383481: Contains obfuscated source code, DFSG violation? 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]
Processed: retitle 382013 to initramfs-tools needs to honor do_bootloader in /etc/kernel-img.conf
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.20 > retitle 382013 initramfs-tools needs to honor do_bootloader in > /etc/kernel-img.conf Bug#382013: installation: ernel 2.6.15 does not work after installing ttf-alee thunderbird-locale-fr bash apt and binutils Changed Bug title. > End of message, 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]
Processed: tagging 382013
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.20 > tags 382013 pending Bug#382013: initramfs-tools needs to honor do_bootloader in /etc/kernel-img.conf Tags were: moreinfo Tags added: pending > End of message, 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]
Re: Urgent : megaraid and qla2300 modules not found
On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 03:05:35PM +0200, De Leeuw Guy wrote: > Hello, > > I have 2 days to install debian etch on our production server. > I download the last daily build of the cdrom (release > debian-testing-ia64-netinstall.iso 20060815). > But missing the driver megaraid legacy and qla2300 on the cdrom > > It's my last chance to migrate our redhat to debian > > could you help me by building a new daily build iso with these 2 modules > or minimum with the megaraid_legacy ? I'll fix this for the next build - thanks for reporting it. In the meantime it might be easiest for you to: * grab http://mirrors.kernel.org/debian/pool/main/l/linux-2.6.16/linux-image-2.6.16-2-itanium-smp_2.6.16-17_ia64.deb * extract the contents somewhere: dpkg-deb -x linux-image-2.6.16-2-itanium-smp_2.6.16-17_ia64.deb /tmp/dir * Post the modules you need on an http server somewhere * Once your network is up, drop to a shell and wget the drivers from your server * Use insmod/modprobe to load these modules * return to the installer If you have problems, like you don't have access to an http server, etc, hop on #debian-ia64 & i'll try to help you out. -- dann frazier -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#383481: supporting evidence to claim
Let's take a quick look in
linux-2.6/drivers/video/nvidia/nv_hw.c:NvLoadStateExt(), shall we?
{...}
if (par->Architecture >= NV_ARCH_40) {
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x * 4, 0x8010);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0001 * 4, 0x00101202);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0002 * 4, 0x8011);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0003 * 4, 0x00101204);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0004 * 4, 0x8012);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0005 * 4, 0x00101206);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0006 * 4, 0x8013);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0007 * 4, 0x00101208);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0008 * 4, 0x8014);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0009 * 4, 0x0010120A);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x000A * 4, 0x8015);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x000B * 4, 0x0010120C);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x000C * 4, 0x8016);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x000D * 4, 0x0010120E);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x000E * 4, 0x8017);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x000F * 4, 0x00101210);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0800 * 4, 0x3000);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0801 * 4, par->FbMapSize - 1);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0802 * 4, 0x0002);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0808 * 4, 0x02080062);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0809 * 4, 0x);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x080A * 4, 0x1200);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x080B * 4, 0x1200);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x080C * 4, 0x);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x080D * 4, 0x);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0810 * 4, 0x02080043);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0811 * 4, 0x);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0812 * 4, 0x);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0813 * 4, 0x);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0814 * 4, 0x);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0815 * 4, 0x);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0818 * 4, 0x02080044);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0819 * 4, 0x0200);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x081A * 4, 0x);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x081B * 4, 0x);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x081C * 4, 0x);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x081D * 4, 0x);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0820 * 4, 0x02080019);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0821 * 4, 0x);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0822 * 4, 0x);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0823 * 4, 0x);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0824 * 4, 0x);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0825 * 4, 0x);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0828 * 4, 0x020A005C);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0829 * 4, 0x);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x082A * 4, 0x);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x082B * 4, 0x);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x082C * 4, 0x);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x082D * 4, 0x);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0830 * 4, 0x0208009F);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0831 * 4, 0x);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0832 * 4, 0x1200);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0833 * 4, 0x1200);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0834 * 4, 0x);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0835 * 4, 0x);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0838 * 4, 0x0208004A);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0839 * 4, 0x0200);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x083A * 4, 0x);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x083B * 4, 0x);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x083C * 4, 0x);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x083D * 4, 0x);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0840 * 4, 0x02080077);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0841 * 4, 0x);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0842 * 4, 0x1200);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0843 * 4, 0x1200);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0844 * 4, 0x);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x0845 * 4, 0x);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x084C * 4, 0x3002);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x084D * 4, 0x7FFF);
NV_WR32(par->PRAMIN, 0x084E * 4,
par->FbUsableSize | 0x0002);
{...}
Wow. Looks a lot like copying register bank settings. Much like
the drivers listed in Bug#383403.
Enjoy.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: change submitter
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > submitter 383481 ! Bug#383481: nvidiafb is not in the preferred form of modification either Changed Bug submitter from Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to Kyle McMartin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > 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#383403: closed by maximilian attems <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Re: Bug#383403: linux-2.6: includes nondistributable and non-free binary firmware)
Maks - On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 12:48:15AM -0700, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: > On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 05:17:34PM -0700, Larry Doolittle wrote: > > Package: linux-2.6 > > Severity: serious > > Justification: Policy 2.1 > > how about if you check for duplicate bug reports! > see #242866 for same style. I'm aware of #242866, and I'd be happy to work within that report. Something about it seems broken, however, because RC-buggy linux-2.6 packages keep making it into testing. Is it obvious how to keep this from happening, without starting a new bug attached to linux-2.6? > > The following 59 files, found in Debian's linux-2.6_2.6.17.orig.tar.gz, > > apparently contain software in binary form, for which Debian has no > > corresponding source code. Debian policy states that "The program > > must include source code, and must allow distribution in source code > > as well as compiled form." Therefore Debian must not distribute these > > files. > > you give zero prove that they are not register code, Huh. Have you actually looked at the files in question? I don't actually care what the data is called. Take a near-random example: drivers/scsi/qlogicpti_asm.c 1. The file represents approximately 18482 bytes of binary data. Nobody enters that in hex without machine help. 2. The file name refers to "asm", commonly understood shorthand for "assembler", the process of (or program for) converting human-legible code to such binaries. 3. Similar binaries from the same manufacturer, that are downloaded to boards serving a similar function, are provided with assembly source code. If you find any of those 59 files that does _not_ look like it was machine-generated from source code at some point in its history, or find comments from the author explaining how they wrote those files from scratch by typing in hex numbers, please let me know so I can correct my inventory. If you can even show hints that a file is miscategorized, I would be happy to participate in constructive discussion. Your throwaway one-liner above is not a good start. - Larry -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#383486: DAC960 module not loaded following install
reassign 383486 initramfs-tools thanks On Thursday 17 August 2006 17:37, Tim Small wrote: > Following installation of Etch, using the Beta 3 installer (netinst CD > image), installation runs to completion without error, on reboot, grub > appears fine, and the kernel loads, but during boot hangs with > something like "waiting for root filesystem". The root partition is on > a Mylex DAC960PRL RAID controller, and there is no sign of the relevant > module being loaded during boot. > > PCI vendor ID for the device is: 0x1069 > PCI device ID for the device is: 0x0010 > > I presume the problem lies in the initramfs, but I can't easily get > into the system to dig around further... > > grub boot options are: > > kernel /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.16-2-686 root=/dev/rd!c0d0p2 ro > initrd /boot/initrd.img-2.6.16-2-686 pgpfE36lUiaBB.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#383403: closed by maximilian attems <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Re: Bug#383403: linux-2.6: includes nondistributable and non-free binary firmware)
On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 08:57:52AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I'm aware of #242866, and I'd be happy to work within > that report. Something about it seems broken, however, > because RC-buggy linux-2.6 packages keep making it into > testing. Is it obvious how to keep this from happening, > without starting a new bug attached to linux-2.6? if you feel like it reassign it, anyway linux-2.6 is frozen and propagation to testing is coordinated with the release and the d-i team. > Take a near-random example: drivers/scsi/qlogicpti_asm.c well that's not a ramdon sample as linus was _always_ joking on the size of the diffstat due to qlogic firmware upgrades. on the other side a good example to remove people access to their discs. > If you find any of those 59 files that does _not_ look > like it was machine-generated from source code at some > point in its history, or find comments from the author > explaining how they wrote those files from scratch by > typing in hex numbers, please let me know so I can > correct my inventory. If you can even show hints that > a file is miscategorized, I would be happy to participate > in constructive discussion. > > Your throwaway one-liner above is not a good start. your thrown away grepping is the bad start. anyway if you want to improve the legal situtation use: http://wiki.debian.org/KernelFirmwareLicensing dilinger succeeded in various firmware relicensing thanks to his quest to the vendors. feel free to pick up. -- maks -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Urgent : megaraid and qla2300 modules not found
Hello, On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 03:05:35PM +0200, De Leeuw Guy wrote: > But missing the driver megaraid legacy and qla2300 on the cdrom to get qla2xxx drivers working, you need the firmware images from non-free. A first build is in experimental: ftp://ftp.debian.org/debian/pool/non-free/f/firmware-nonfree/firmware-qlogic_0.1_all.deb and even an udeb, which the installer cannot load automatically yet: ftp://ftp.debian.org/debian/pool/non-free/f/firmware-nonfree/firmware-qlogic-di_0.1_all.udeb These firmwares work well with 2.6.16 and 2.6.17 kernels. Best regards Frederik Schueler -- ENOSIG signature.asc Description: Digital signature
initramfs-tools_0.74_amd64.changes ACCEPTED
Accepted: initramfs-tools_0.74.dsc to pool/main/i/initramfs-tools/initramfs-tools_0.74.dsc initramfs-tools_0.74.tar.gz to pool/main/i/initramfs-tools/initramfs-tools_0.74.tar.gz initramfs-tools_0.74_all.deb to pool/main/i/initramfs-tools/initramfs-tools_0.74_all.deb Override entries for your package: initramfs-tools_0.74.dsc - source utils initramfs-tools_0.74_all.deb - optional utils Announcing to debian-devel-changes@lists.debian.org Closing bugs: 381535 382013 Thank you for your contribution to Debian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processing of initramfs-tools_0.74_amd64.changes
initramfs-tools_0.74_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: initramfs-tools_0.74.dsc initramfs-tools_0.74.tar.gz initramfs-tools_0.74_all.deb Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#383299: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686: 2.6.17-2 XFS error
On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 04:27:35PM +0200, Fredrik Olofsson wrote: > On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 11:57:58AM +0200, maximilian attems wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 10:23:45AM +0200, Fredrik Olofsson wrote: > > > Now I only have to find out "the Debian way" of getting a root shell > > > before / is remounted read-write so I can check that filesystem as > > > well... > > > > boot into single user mode by either appending 1 or single > > on the boot line, kernel args are the same across distributions. > > This does not work since all filesystems are mounted rw at the point > where "single" stops. I solved it by using the kernel arg "ydebug" which > yaird initramfs images looks for and halts just before switching to the > real / filesystem. uups yes forgot to add that you need to pass 'ro' as bootarg too! sorry ;-) > Again, thanks for the help > /Fredrik > greetings -- maks -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#383486: marked as done (DAC960 module not loaded following install)
Your message dated Thu, 17 Aug 2006 13:54:49 -0300 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Closed in previous upload 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) --- Begin Message --- Package: installation Version: Etch Beta 3 Following installation of Etch, using the Beta 3 installer (netinst CD image), installation runs to completion without error, on reboot, grub appears fine, and the kernel loads, but during boot hangs with something like "waiting for root filesystem". The root partition is on a Mylex DAC960PRL RAID controller, and there is no sign of the relevant module being loaded during boot. PCI vendor ID for the device is: 0x1069 PCI device ID for the device is: 0x0010 I presume the problem lies in the initramfs, but I can't easily get into the system to dig around further... grub boot options are: kernel /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.16-2-686 root=/dev/rd!c0d0p2 ro initrd /boot/initrd.img-2.6.16-2-686 --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Version: 1.65 This bug was close in Martin's last upload. Closing it. -- O T A V I OS A L V A D O R - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] UIN: 5906116 GNU/Linux User: 239058 GPG ID: 49A5F855 Home Page: http://www.freedom.ind.br/otavio - "Microsoft gives you Windows ... Linux gives you the whole house." --- End Message ---
Processed: Re: Bug#383486: DAC960 module not loaded following install
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > retitle 383486 update-grub provides broken root boot param for DAC960 Bug#383486: DAC960 module not loaded following install Changed Bug title. (By the way, that Bug is currently marked as done.) > reassign 383486 grub Bug#383486: update-grub provides broken root boot param for DAC960 Bug reassigned from package `initramfs-tools' to `grub'. > 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#382013: marked as done (initramfs-tools needs to honor do_bootloader in /etc/kernel-img.conf)
Your message dated Thu, 17 Aug 2006 09:47:17 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#382013: fixed in initramfs-tools 0.74 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) --- Begin Message --- Package: installation Severity: normal In my system (Debian testing), I use kernel 2.6.15 for some monthes. Yesterday evening, I'have done: apt-get install ttf-alee thunderbird-locale-fr bash apt binutils (I had seen they were available with apt-get -s update andapt-get -s upgrade). After this installation, thunderbird was working fine, in french. However, at rebooting the system, this morning, the system doesnot boot, with kernel 2.6.15. It stops with some panic error, related to a thing about ramfs, at early stage of boot. This boot try is not written nor in /var/log/syslog, nor in /var/log/messages. However, the system boots correctly with the old 2.6.12 kernel, when ADSL internet correction, udev, and X does not work correctly with my 2.6.12 instalation. -- 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 2.6.12-1-686 Locale: LANG=fr_FR.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Source: initramfs-tools Source-Version: 0.74 We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of initramfs-tools, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive: initramfs-tools_0.74.dsc to pool/main/i/initramfs-tools/initramfs-tools_0.74.dsc initramfs-tools_0.74.tar.gz to pool/main/i/initramfs-tools/initramfs-tools_0.74.tar.gz initramfs-tools_0.74_all.deb to pool/main/i/initramfs-tools/initramfs-tools_0.74_all.deb A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is attached. Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed. If you have further comments please address them to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate. Debian distribution maintenance software pp. maximilian attems <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (supplier of updated initramfs-tools package) (This message was generated automatically at their request; if you believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive administrators by mailing [EMAIL PROTECTED]) -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 16:50:51 +0200 Source: initramfs-tools Binary: initramfs-tools Architecture: source all Version: 0.74 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian kernel team Changed-By: maximilian attems <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Description: initramfs-tools - tools for generating an initramfs Closes: 381535 382013 Changes: initramfs-tools (0.74) unstable; urgency=low . * scripts/local-premount/resume: Reuse klibc resume, hardcode path as uswsusp shipps too an resume binary in initramfs-tools. Thus tighten again klibc dep to 1.4.11-1. (closes: 381535) . * mkinitramfs: Readd mdrun when around. . * scripts/local-top/mdrun: Rename from mdraid. Use mdrun as previously, there is no guarantee that the sarge mdadm works and that the sarge mdadm.conf has any sense. . * debian/control: Better package description. . * scripts/local: mountroot add message what to check if root is not found in 2 straight lines to keep as much of scrolling buffer. . * scripts/functions: Use set ``--'' to change positional paramaters without changing any options. This is useful for the debug bootparam on d?ash. . * update-initramfs: Respect "do_bootloader = yes" from /etc/kernel-img.conf to call lilo if both lilo and grub are installed. (closes: 382013) Files: fed04653fc06d35271ec488baeb47e47 623 utils optional initramfs-tools_0.74.dsc 53faf8714f77078c76fdddc26fd339f9 46442 utils optional initramfs-tools_0.74.tar.gz ecbb8eeb3af80ce93f13ce9f9bcd5faa 51748 utils optional initramfs-tools_0.74_all.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFE5JrI6n7So0GVSSARAtQdAJ9TNuqylvjjKJwPeCLvoOYPjtom+ACgn0RA iojch6gL0mcJbHRlQM9OOyc= =z5u/ -END PGP SIGNATURE- --- End Message ---
Bug#383499: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686: USB Keyboard not recognized anymore
Package: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686 Version: 2.6.17-6 Severity: important -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable') Architecture: i386 (i686) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.15-1-686 Locale: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] (charmap=ISO-8859-15) Versions of packages linux-image-2.6.17-2-686 depends on: ii module-init-tools 3.2.2-3tools for managing Linux kernel mo ii yaird [linux-initramfs-tool] 0.0.12-17 Yet Another mkInitRD Versions of packages linux-image-2.6.17-2-686 recommends: ii libc6-i6862.3.6-19 GNU C Library: Shared libraries [i -- debconf information: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/postinst/old-initrd-link-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/postinst/old-dir-initrd-link-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/preinst/lilo-initrd-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/postinst/depmod-error-initrd-2.6.17-2-686: false linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/postinst/create-kimage-link-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/preinst/lilo-has-ramdisk: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/preinst/already-running-this-2.6.17-2-686: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/preinst/bootloader-initrd-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/preinst/initrd-2.6.17-2-686: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/preinst/abort-install-2.6.17-2-686: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/preinst/elilo-initrd-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/preinst/failed-to-move-modules-2.6.17-2-686: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/postinst/really-run-bootloader-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/postinst/bootloader-test-error-2.6.17-2-686: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/prerm/removing-running-kernel-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/preinst/abort-overwrite-2.6.17-2-686: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/postinst/old-system-map-link-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/preinst/overwriting-modules-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/postinst/kimage-is-a-directory: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/prerm/would-invalidate-boot-loader-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/postinst/depmod-error-2.6.17-2-686: false linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/postinst/bootloader-error-2.6.17-2-686: with linux image -2.6.17-2-686 or -2.6.16-2-686 my usb keyboard is not recognized anymore (only the laptop keyboard is recognized), but it does with linux-image-2.6.15-1-686. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#383486: DAC960 module not loaded following install
retitle 383486 update-grub provides broken root boot param for DAC960 reassign 383486 grub thanks On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 06:36:28PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote: > On Thursday 17 August 2006 17:37, Tim Small wrote: > > Following installation of Etch, using the Beta 3 installer (netinst CD > > image), installation runs to completion without error, on reboot, grub > > appears fine, and the kernel loads, but during boot hangs with > > something like "waiting for root filesystem". The root partition is on > > a Mylex DAC960PRL RAID controller, and there is no sign of the relevant > > module being loaded during boot. > > > > PCI vendor ID for the device is: 0x1069 > > PCI device ID for the device is: 0x0010 > > > > I presume the problem lies in the initramfs, but I can't easily get > > into the system to dig around further... > > > > grub boot options are: > > > > kernel /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.16-2-686 root=/dev/rd!c0d0p2 ro > > initrd /boot/initrd.img-2.6.16-2-686 please try to boot with root=/dev/rd/c0d0p2 the exclamation point was already wrongly added in the past for cciss and ida block devices. please post if that cures your problem? thanks for feedback -- maks -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: Re: Bug#383486: DAC960 module not loaded following install
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reassign 383486 initramfs-tools Bug#383486: DAC960 module not loaded following install Bug reassigned from package `installation' to `initramfs-tools'. > 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#381535: marked as done (resume does not work in all cases)
Your message dated Thu, 17 Aug 2006 09:47:17 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#381535: fixed in initramfs-tools 0.74 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) --- Begin Message --- Package: initramfs-tools Version: 0.73 Severity: grave Justification: makes the package unsuitable for release in maintainer's opinion After upgrading from testing (0.69b) to unstable (0.73), resuming from hibernation no longer works -- it just boots as normal. Downgrading fixes the issue. -- Package-specific info: -- /proc/cmdline root=/dev/mapper/Debian-root ro resume=/dev/hda5 -- /proc/filesystems cramfs ext3 -- lsmod Module Size Used by ppp_deflate 5792 0 zlib_deflate 18616 1 ppp_deflate ppp_async 10720 1 crc_ccitt 2208 1 ppp_async ppp_generic25492 6 ppp_deflate,ppp_async slhc6496 1 ppp_generic i915 16384 1 drm61556 2 i915 rfcomm 33428 4 l2cap 21504 7 rfcomm ppdev 8516 0 parport_pc 32132 0 lp 10852 0 parport33160 3 ppdev,parport_pc,lp button 6544 0 ac 4836 0 battery 9188 0 ipv6 221760 12 cpufreq_ondemand7148 0 speedstep_centrino 7216 1 freq_table 4544 1 speedstep_centrino sbp2 20648 0 scsi_mod 123080 1 sbp2 loop 14888 0 joydev 8992 0 mousedev 10788 1 tsdev 7392 0 snd_hda_intel 17140 1 snd_hda_codec 125408 1 snd_hda_intel snd_pcm_oss35936 0 snd_mixer_oss 15872 1 snd_pcm_oss snd_pcm74500 3 snd_hda_intel,snd_hda_codec,snd_pcm_oss pcmcia 34012 0 snd_timer 20836 1 snd_pcm hw_random 5624 0 snd48100 8 snd_hda_intel,snd_hda_codec,snd_pcm_oss,snd_mixer_oss,snd_pcm,snd_timer intel_agp 21116 1 ipw3945 170752 0 soundcore 9216 1 snd hci_usb14740 3 agpgart29864 3 drm,intel_agp ieee80211 29256 1 ipw3945 ieee80211_crypt 5856 1 ieee80211 bluetooth 42884 7 rfcomm,l2cap,hci_usb i2c_i8018236 0 psmouse34600 0 yenta_socket 23884 1 snd_page_alloc 9512 2 snd_hda_intel,snd_pcm firmware_class 9696 2 pcmcia,ipw3945 i2c_core 19520 1 i2c_i801 serio_raw 6596 0 rsrc_nonstatic 11968 1 yenta_socket pcmcia_core37300 3 pcmcia,yenta_socket,rsrc_nonstatic eth139418052 0 evdev 9088 2 rtc12340 0 pcspkr 3040 0 ext3 118152 6 jbd50260 1 ext3 mbcache 8324 1 ext3 dm_mirror 18768 0 dm_snapshot15680 0 dm_mod 49976 8 dm_mirror,dm_snapshot ide_generic 1376 0 [permanent] ide_disk 15072 4 piix9476 0 [permanent] uhci_hcd 20392 0 ohci1394 30608 0 ieee1394 86584 3 sbp2,eth1394,ohci1394 tg392772 0 generic 4420 0 [permanent] ide_core 110888 4 ide_generic,ide_disk,piix,generic ehci_hcd 28008 0 usbcore 111616 4 hci_usb,uhci_hcd,ehci_hcd thermal12904 0 processor 25512 2 speedstep_centrino,thermal fan 4516 0 -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (500, 'stable'), (1, 'experimental') Architecture: i386 (i686) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.17-1-686 Locale: LANG=nb_NO.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=nb_NO.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Versions of packages initramfs-tools depends on: ii busybox 1:1.1.3-2 Tiny utilities for small and embed ii cpio 2.6-16 GNU cpio -- a program to manage ar ii klibc-utils 1.4.11-3 small statically-linked utilities ii module-init-tools 3.2.2-3tools for managing Linux kernel mo ii udev 0.093-1/dev/ and hotplug management daemo initramfs-tools
linux-2.6: includes nondistributable and non-free binary firmware
Maks - On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 06:05:30PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote: > > Something about [bug #242866] seems broken, however, > > because RC-buggy linux-2.6 packages keep making it into > > testing. Is it obvious how to keep this from happening, > > without starting a new bug attached to linux-2.6? > > if you feel like it reassign it, > anyway linux-2.6 is frozen and propagation to testing > is coordinated with the release and the d-i team. Sorry, I don't understand this statement. > on the other side a good example to remove people access to > their discs. That's the argument that sent sarge out the door with DFSG violations. > anyway if you want to improve the legal situtation use: > http://wiki.debian.org/KernelFirmwareLicensing > dilinger succeeded in various firmware relicensing > thanks to his quest to the vendors. feel free to pick up. For each offending file, there are three possible solutions: 1. Get the author to release source code under a DFSG-free license 2. Move the firmware to non-free, patching the driver to use request_firmware() 3. Delete the driver and firmware entirely. AFAIK, the best outcome yet from the relicensing discussions on http://wiki.debian.org/KernelFirmwareLicensing is to properly permit the redistribution of the binary, without source code. That's fine for debian non-free, and a necessary step for making option (2) above work properly. Until and unless the entire Linux kernel is moved to non-free, such relicensing doesn't solve the fundamental bug. I agree that option (3) is bad, but I still recommend it for the short term. It's the quickest path to a legal and SC-conforming Linux release, and it will bring people out of the closet to volunteer to work on (2). I think (2) is the actual goal, but maybe not one that can be finished before the proposed etch freeze -- especially since most of the blobs need to be relicensed before they can be made part of firmware-nonfree. I would be amazed and impressed if option (1) could be made to work for any of these files. I don't volunteer to try. If the kernel team decides on (2) or (3), I'd be happy to help with the coding. (Note that, due to the unfortunate state of upstream, most of the patching/deletion has to happen in the creation of the .orig.tar.gz file, not the .diff.gz file) Unfortunately, due to a lack of hardware, I can't help with any testing (other than "does it compile"). - Larry -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: linux-2.6: includes nondistributable and non-free binary firmware
On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 10:07:42AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > For each offending file, there are three possible solutions: > 1. Get the author to release source code under a DFSG-free license > yes that is some work so commit yourself. the rest is not the intent of the DFSG. -- maks ps last post to this useless bug report -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: linux-2.6: includes nondistributable and non-free binary firmware
[Reply-To set to the list, I really don't want this idiocy in my personal Inbox.] On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 10:07:42AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > If the kernel team decides on (2) or (3), I'd be happy to > help with the coding. (Note that, due to the unfortunate > state of upstream, most of the patching/deletion has to > happen in the creation of the .orig.tar.gz file, not the > .diff.gz file) Unfortunately, due to a lack of hardware, > I can't help with any testing (other than "does it compile"). > No wonder you're so fucking enthusiastic about removing support for hardware. You don't own any of it. How fucking convenient. Since we seem to be pissing all over the spirit of the Social Contract in the name of some holy quest for the unattainable goal of cooperative vendors, Matthew Garrett[1] and I[2] have filed bugs to remove support for all NVidia devices. Enjoy VESA folks. 1. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=383465 2. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=383481 Now, I don't think you understand what "preferred form of modification" is. In all likelihood, the engineer who wrote, for example, the QLogic driver, never even touched the firmware, never once questioned it, another engineer simply gave him an array to copy to the card. The engineer who wrote the driver didn't know, or care, about what should have just been on an EEPROM, all he cared about was properly writing a Linux driver to talk to the hardware. This is the difference between a piece of firmware, and an actual binary blob that something calls into. Conviently, this is also the difference between the ``free'' NVidiot drivers, and any of the firmware-encumbered drivers you posted. No one, and I really mean No One, can really claim to contribute meaningfully to those NVidia drivers. However, all of the other drivers you mentioned have likely had substancially contributions from outsiders (other than the vendor, I mean.) (I say "likely" with a degree of certainty, having seen patches from !vendors for most of them.) Now, don't you have something better to do than hurt our users? Lots of love, Kyle M. PS: I feel it again worth mentioning, that even if there were no firmware in the driver, you would just get the exact same data if you pulled the EEPROM and stuck it in a reader. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#383499: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686: USB Keyboard not recognized anymore
tags 383499 moreinfo severity 383499 normal stop On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 06:59:17PM +0200, Michael Henneton wrote: > > with linux image -2.6.17-2-686 or -2.6.16-2-686 > my usb keyboard is not recognized anymore (only the laptop keyboard is > recognized), but it does with linux-image-2.6.15-1-686. which version of udev are you using, post the output of dpkg -l udev -- maks -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#383403: closed by maximilian attems <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Re: Bug#383403: linux-2.6: includes nondistributable and non-free binary firmware)
On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 06:05:30PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote: > On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 08:57:52AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > your thrown away grepping is the bad start. Maks, please don't pick up a fight with larry so quickly, this is something that you know was coming, which all the kernel team knew was coming, and the release team also was aware of as shown with the past hints from Andreas Barth, wearing his RM hat, about this. > anyway if you want to improve the legal situtation use: > http://wiki.debian.org/KernelFirmwareLicensing > dilinger succeeded in various firmware relicensing > thanks to his quest to the vendors. feel free to pick up. Notice that i was the first who started this and contacted broadcom, but then Andres did most of the follow up work on this, and as said, it makes those firmware again distributable, but not free enough to enter main. I am dubious though that the wiki page can easily be modified to look as nicely as the page larry provided, but then i am no wiki expert, so i will let others comment who are more wiki experts (jonas maybe ?). Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: linux-2.6: includes nondistributable and non-free binary firmware
On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 02:41:52PM -0400, Kyle McMartin wrote: > [Reply-To set to the list, I really don't want this idiocy in my > personal Inbox.] Kyle, this idiocy as you say it, is grounded in what we all claim and agreed to in the social contract, which is a binding document to all DDs. You may disagree with it, but please, at least stay polite, ok ? > On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 10:07:42AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > If the kernel team decides on (2) or (3), I'd be happy to > > help with the coding. (Note that, due to the unfortunate > > state of upstream, most of the patching/deletion has to > > happen in the creation of the .orig.tar.gz file, not the > > .diff.gz file) Unfortunately, due to a lack of hardware, > > I can't help with any testing (other than "does it compile"). > > No wonder you're so fucking enthusiastic about removing support for > hardware. You don't own any of it. How fucking convenient. Erm, some guys tried to kick me out of debian for showing unpoliteness, so please moderate your language here. > Since we seem to be pissing all over the spirit of the Social Contract > in the name of some holy quest for the unattainable goal of cooperative > vendors, Matthew Garrett[1] and I[2] have filed bugs to remove support for > all NVidia devices. Enjoy VESA folks. Or simply don't buy nvidia hardware :) They have since forever (i remember talks about their binary only driver in the tnt2 days), been the worse enemy's of the free software community from all the graphic card manufacturers. > 1. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=383465 > 2. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=383481 > > Now, I don't think you understand what "preferred form of modification" is. > > In all likelihood, the engineer who wrote, for example, the QLogic driver, > never even touched the firmware, never once questioned it, another engineer > simply gave him an array to copy to the card. The engineer who wrote the > driver didn't know, or care, about what should have just been on an EEPROM, > all he cared about was properly writing a Linux driver to talk to the > hardware. So, what ? Would your reasoning mean we can move the unicorn driver into main ? It includes a binary-only soft-ADSL library, which i personally know, that not only the original unicorn author never saw the source for, but that even the compmany who produces the hardware for it never even saw the source code, since they bought the binary as is from some random chip company. Then, if you accept this in main, where would be your next step ? > This is the difference between a piece of firmware, and an actual > binary blob that something calls into. No, what is important is what the prefered form of modification is, and this is the one used by the original author, and not what whoever ships the binary in a modified form along the way has. > Conviently, this is also the difference between the ``free'' NVidiot > drivers, and any of the firmware-encumbered drivers you posted. No one, > and I really mean No One, can really claim to contribute meaningfully > to those NVidia drivers. However, all of the other drivers you mentioned Ah, you have a good point, but this goes down into free hardware, andthere has been very few discussion about this around. Indeed, one could argue that the effective prefered form for modification of all those drivers is the hardware specs document, or even go beyond to the actual vhdl file for the chip, and the schematic for the board its hosted in. > have likely had substancially contributions from outsiders (other than > the vendor, I mean.) (I say "likely" with a degree of certainty, having > seen patches from !vendors for most of them.) So ? > Now, don't you have something better to do than hurt our users? > > Lots of love, > Kyle M. > > PS: I feel it again worth mentioning, that even if there were no firmware > in the driver, you would just get the exact same data if you pulled the > EEPROM and stuck it in a reader. Indeed. We don't chip the EEPROM though, and thus our DFSG doesn't applies to this. If you have trouble standing up to the principles of the DFSG, or some issue with the social contract, as interpreted by the last GR we had about this, feel free to propose your own GR about this, and await for the outcome. Just complaining puts you in the same class as those guys who complained about the non-free firmware, but unlike Larry, did not contribute any amount of actual work. Friendly, Sven Luther > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --- > Orange vous informe que cet e-mail a ete controle par l'anti-virus mail. > Aucun virus connu a ce jour par nos services n'a ete detecte. > > > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
Re: linux-2.6: includes nondistributable and non-free binary firmware
Kyle - On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 02:41:52PM -0400, Kyle McMartin wrote: > No wonder you're so *** enthusiastic about removing support for > hardware. You don't own any of it. How *** convenient. Can I deduce from this that _you_ own some of the affected hardware? If I patch in request_firmware() support for that driver, would you be willing to test it? > Since we seem to be pissing all over the spirit of the Social Contract > in the name of some holy quest for the unattainable goal of cooperative > vendors, Fully cooperative vendors would be nice, but I agree in most cases that's unattainable. Until that miraculous day arrives, the firmware that they supply needs to be removed from the free Linux kernel, have its license checked, and put into the firmware-nonfree package set up for that purpose. If you disagree with that process, say so. > Now, I don't think you understand what "preferred form of modification" is. Trust me, as someone who has written and maintained firmware, I know what the "preferred form of modification" is. > In all likelihood, the engineer who wrote, for example, the QLogic driver, > never even touched the firmware, never once questioned it, another engineer > simply gave him an array to copy to the card. The engineer who wrote the > driver didn't know, or care, about what should have just been on an EEPROM, > all he cared about was properly writing a Linux driver to talk to the > hardware. You're probably right, since the Linux driver was probably written after the Windows driver. In a small company there is usually good communication and shared debugging sessions between the firmware author(s) and their first "client", that is, the author of the first driver. > This is the difference between a piece of firmware, and an actual > binary blob that something calls into. I'm sorry if I used the word "blob" for something unusual. Binary blobs that get linked to by the kernel and executed are not firmware, and from a practical perspective are worse. Linus doesn't let those into the kernel, and taints kernels if they are loaded as modules. Legally, library blobs (executed by the Linux processor) and firmware blobs (executed by outboard controllers) are not all that different. > Now, don't you have something better to do than hurt our users? I can think of a few snide replies to this. Can we instead please keep emotion out of this discussion? Can we agree that etch must have a DFSG-free Linux kernel, and we need to work together to make that kernel work as well as possible for as many users as possible? > PS: I feel it again worth mentioning, that even if there were no firmware > in the driver, you would just get the exact same data if you pulled the > EEPROM and stuck it in a reader. The origin of our problem is that manufacturers have taken to saving themselves a little money by leaving the EEPROM off their boards, and putting the firmware on the MS-Windows[TM] driver CD instead. While they are presumably happy to let Linux users use that same firmware, the legal and practical mechanism to have that happen is (in the cases I flagged) broken. If you take an EEPROM and stick it in a reader, you (the owner of the hardware) probably have fair use rights to put it on a disk and boot your hardware from it. Since that firmware is copyrighted, and you don't own the copyright, you do not have the right to post it to the web or submit it to the mainline Linux kernel tree. - Larry -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: linux-2.6: includes nondistributable and non-free binary firmware
On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 10:07:42AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Maks - > > On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 06:05:30PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote: > > > Something about [bug #242866] seems broken, however, > > > because RC-buggy linux-2.6 packages keep making it into > > > testing. Is it obvious how to keep this from happening, > > > without starting a new bug attached to linux-2.6? > > > > if you feel like it reassign it, > > anyway linux-2.6 is frozen and propagation to testing > > is coordinated with the release and the d-i team. > > Sorry, I don't understand this statement. linux-2.6 will no more migrate to testing without the RMs explicit aproval. The RMs in this case being Andreas Barth and Steve Langasek (and some new RM team members i don't remember exactly offhand), and it is they who have the ultimate word of what will be included in etch. Please contact the debian-release@lists.debian.org mailing list to comment on this. > > on the other side a good example to remove people access to > > their discs. > > That's the argument that sent sarge out the door with > DFSG violations. No, what allowed sarge to go out the door with DFSG violations was an unambigous GR by a majority of the debian developers who decided to include those non-free firmware (and GFDL docs, and some random fonts, and ...), into sarge even though they didn't quite meet the DFSG. That vote is not valid for etch though, as we decided to waive that only for sarge, so only a new GR will allow debian to release the current kernel with non-free firmware as part of etch, independently of the migration scripts you are so worried about above. > > anyway if you want to improve the legal situtation use: > > http://wiki.debian.org/KernelFirmwareLicensing > > dilinger succeeded in various firmware relicensing > > thanks to his quest to the vendors. feel free to pick up. > > For each offending file, there are three possible solutions: > 1. Get the author to release source code under a DFSG-free license > 2. Move the firmware to non-free, patching the driver to use >request_firmware() > 3. Delete the driver and firmware entirely. 4. Move the whole friver to non-free, without major patching. 5. Reverse engineer the needed firmware, and create a trully free driver. > AFAIK, the best outcome yet from the relicensing discussions > on http://wiki.debian.org/KernelFirmwareLicensing is to properly > permit the redistribution of the binary, without source code. Indeed, but even that was laughed at back then when we started at it, and you should have seen the reaction of LKML when i mentioned it there. Maks and kyle's reaction are child's play compared to them :) > That's fine for debian non-free, and a necessary step for making > option (2) above work properly. Until and unless the entire > Linux kernel is moved to non-free, such relicensing doesn't > solve the fundamental bug. Indeed. > I agree that option (3) is bad, but I still recommend it for > the short term. It's the quickest path to a legal and For the short term, 4. is a better solution. > SC-conforming Linux release, and it will bring people out > of the closet to volunteer to work on (2). I think (2) > is the actual goal, but maybe not one that can be finished > before the proposed etch freeze -- especially since most > of the blobs need to be relicensed before they can be made > part of firmware-nonfree. Indeed, which is because we could also consider : 6. Pass another GR to allow debian/etch to release as is, provided we commit to a real effort to solve this for etch+1, or better yet, with some pro-active wording, which say we will make every effort to solve this issue, but don't provide timelines and schedules, as upstream will probably bring more problematic firmware in in unsuspecting ways. > I would be amazed and impressed if option (1) could be made > to work for any of these files. I don't volunteer to try. :) > If the kernel team decides on (2) or (3), I'd be happy to > help with the coding. (Note that, due to the unfortunate Your help is welcome, we await the first of your patches breathlessly :) > state of upstream, most of the patching/deletion has to > happen in the creation of the .orig.tar.gz file, not the > .diff.gz file) Unfortunately, due to a lack of hardware, > I can't help with any testing (other than "does it compile"). This is not a problem, we can easily enough spin a linux-2.6-2.6.18.dfsg1 or someting when the time is ready. There is not much time before the actual etch release is at hand, which is why 6. is probably a better solution right now, especially if you consider that while we delay etch, debian/sarge will still carry those non-free bits, and so even if we delay etch until around the same time we would have had etch+1 out the door (18 month from december 6, or june 6 2008), we would have gained nothing with regard to freeness. So, let's get etch out the door as is, or with the work we can do until the free
Re: linux-2.6: includes nondistributable and non-free binary firmware
keep me out of this thread. enough time is lost with any of those dfsg firmware wankers, that do _zero_ work upstream or on the licensing front. the drivers are free not-fucking non-free. rest in peace -- maks -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: linux-2.6: includes nondistributable and non-free binary firmware
On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 10:06:44PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote: > enough time is lost with any of those dfsg firmware wankers, > that do _zero_ work upstream or on the licensing front. I repeat my offer to patch any (well, almost any) of these drivers to use request_firmware(). I need a volunteer who has the affected hardware and is willing to test my changes. It would also be nice if debian kernel developers expressed interest in incorporating such work (if any) for etch. One alternative sven mentioned is to move these drivers to non-free. I don't see any existing framework for such package(s), but that would indeed involve less coding and debugging. I am concerned about etch, and the pipeline from upstream to Debian is long enough that I think it's too late to work upstream. At least 12 of the 59 files are probably licensed "free enough" for upstream, so upstream will have limited interest in those cases. > the drivers are free not-*** non-free. I agree the drivers are free. That's why I hope we can eventually separate them from the non-free firmware they include. - Larry -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: linux-2.6: includes nondistributable and non-free binary firmware
On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 22:00:18 +0200 Sven Luther wrote: > Erm, some guys tried to kick me out of debian for showing > unpoliteness, so please moderate your language here. ...and repeating over and over and over and over, like here! - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ - Enden er nær: http://www.shibumi.org/eoti.htm pgpmClevStOwz.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: linux-2.6: includes nondistributable and non-free binary firmware
On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 01:19:33PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 10:06:44PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote: > > enough time is lost with any of those dfsg firmware wankers, > > that do _zero_ work upstream or on the licensing front. > > I repeat my offer to patch any (well, almost any) of these > drivers to use request_firmware(). I need a volunteer who > has the affected hardware and is willing to test my changes. > It would also be nice if debian kernel developers expressed > interest in incorporating such work (if any) for etch. I can say that the debian kernel team is interested in incorporating such changes, provided : 1) it is not already too late for it. The RMs will have to judge on that. 2) the proposed patches are well implemented patches of good quality, are well tested and result in no breakage. 3) We are able to solve all those cases for etch, or remove the others. Doing it otherwise would be an injustice, and it would be better to postpone this. 4) The d-i team implement the needed support in d-i to load non-free firmware or even module .udebs, and build non-free flavours of the installer images in an official way. 5) There is seemless integration of these non-free drivers and firmware, and a user will not notice > One alternative sven mentioned is to move these drivers to > non-free. I don't see any existing framework for such > package(s), but that would indeed involve less coding > and debugging. There is, we have prune-non-free in trunk/scripts on the svn repo, as well as the linux-non-free-drivers (or whatever it is called), also in trunk in the svn repo, and which Bastian Blank has been working on since a long time. > I am concerned about etch, and the pipeline from upstream > to Debian is long enough that I think it's too late to > work upstream. long enough ? We inaugurated same-day-uploads with the upstream 2.6.14 release, what do you find long enough about this. But you are right, bringing it upstream will be a long fight, and only be possible post 2.6.18, which is the targeted kernel for etch, so it is out of the question. > At least 12 of the 59 files are probably licensed "free enough" > for upstream, so upstream will have limited interest in those > cases. :) Two of them thanks to previous work of the debian kernel team. Ok. Now that the above was said, my own position still is that it is best to not delay the etch release, to pass a GR to keep the firmware in main for etch, and to immediately actively start working on the solution for etch+1. It is not as if this would come to a surprise to anyone interested in solving this issue the right way, the kernel team has been discussing this over and over since over a year now, and it is back then that help should have come, not now. So, let's not do it in a hurry, but instead do it right for etch+1, which given the release date of the d-i team, is not doable anymore. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: linux-2.6: includes nondistributable and non-free binary firmware
On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 10:50:33PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 22:00:18 +0200 Sven Luther wrote: > > > Erm, some guys tried to kick me out of debian for showing > > unpoliteness, so please moderate your language here. > > ...and repeating over and over and over and over, like here! Well, we would not have been in this mess, if *YOU* had not forced me to over and over and over and over mention the ide-generic issue, and the mess you made of yaird, and if i had not decided that discussion was enough, and actually investigated the issue and proved beyond all doubt that i was right in it. I still have not stomached how you chose to not credit my part of that work in the yaird changelog when you finally reverted the patch you took half an hour in real-life explaining to me that you should not even look at it in erkelenz, when i proposed to you quite friendly, lets site together and have a look and fix it. I even came back positively and constructively 4 days in a row just to end the day in the same state of complete and total exhasperation over your impossible and stuborn position, which was just plain wrong as it was proven in the end, and this just as i learned that my mother had terminal cancer, altough you didn't know about this (but others did and chose not to care). As for the rest, i have made many proposals to settle the issues with the d-i team and frans, even twice appealed to the DPL, but to no result so far, they have fully refused any proposal of settlement since all those months, and are the sole responsibles for me always coming back with this, especially as they regularly continue to bash me, like Frans has done since over a year now. So, i would expect a bit more humility in your own claims when saying things like the above, and to reflect a bit on the part of responsability you have in the current state of affairs before you say stuff like the above. I do appreciate your position on the expulsion request by Andres though, and i have thanked you for it already in the past, and will repeat this again now. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#381844: itramfs-tools doesn't produce working ramdisk on amd64 with MODULES=list
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006, Ivan Sergio Borgonovo wrote: > On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 09:57:54 +0200 > maximilian attems <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > you will get it with adding "debug" as boot param. > > /tmp/initramfs.debug > > attached > please resend with latest initramfs-tools 0.74, should hit the mirrors shortly. log should now cover all the commands exections. regards -- maks -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: linux-2.6: includes nondistributable and non-free binary firmware
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 10:06:44PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote: > > enough time is lost with any of those dfsg firmware wankers, > > that do _zero_ work upstream or on the licensing front. > > I repeat my offer to patch any (well, almost any) of these > drivers to use request_firmware(). I need a volunteer who > has the affected hardware and is willing to test my changes. You may want to start with tg3, that's the place where the last attempt failed. The hardware should be prevalent enough to find testers. Thiemo -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: linux-2.6: includes nondistributable and non-free binary firmware
On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 10:58:12PM +0100, Thiemo Seufer wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 10:06:44PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote: > > > enough time is lost with any of those dfsg firmware wankers, > > > that do _zero_ work upstream or on the licensing front. > > > > I repeat my offer to patch any (well, almost any) of these > > drivers to use request_firmware(). I need a volunteer who > > has the affected hardware and is willing to test my changes. > > You may want to start with tg3, that's the place where the last > attempt failed. The hardware should be prevalent enough to find > testers. Was there not some very very strong opposition to the firmware removal from the tg3 upstream author ? Or was this another case ? Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: linux-2.6: includes nondistributable and non-free binary firmware
On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 23:09:12 +0200 Sven Luther wrote: > On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 10:50:33PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 22:00:18 +0200 Sven Luther wrote: > > > > > Erm, some guys tried to kick me out of debian for showing > > > unpoliteness, so please moderate your language here. > > > > ...and repeating over and over and over and over, like here! > > Well, we would not have been in this mess, if *YOU* had not forced me > to over and over and over and over mention the ide-generic issue, Sure - me packaging yaird is to blame. Obvious! - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ - Enden er nær: http://www.shibumi.org/eoti.htm pgpyfHKe8feFg.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: linux-2.6: includes nondistributable and non-free binary firmware
On Fri, Aug 18, 2006 at 12:04:51AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 23:09:12 +0200 Sven Luther wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 10:50:33PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > > On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 22:00:18 +0200 Sven Luther wrote: > > > > > > > Erm, some guys tried to kick me out of debian for showing > > > > unpoliteness, so please moderate your language here. > > > > > > ...and repeating over and over and over and over, like here! > > > > Well, we would not have been in this mess, if *YOU* had not forced me > > to over and over and over and over mention the ide-generic issue, > > Sure - me packaging yaird is to blame. Obvious! No, you failing to do a responsible job while maintaining yaird is to blame. Or let's say it the other way around. If i hadn't repeated the problem over and over and over and over, and finally taken action, the ide-generic bug would not yet have been closed. Nobody was in a real hurry to investigate it really, and everyone was complaining about it. And as said, you didn't even credit me in the changelog, thus trying to take all the glory for the fixing to you and others, and diminishing my role in it. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: linux-2.6: includes nondistributable and non-free binary firmware
On Fri, 18 Aug 2006 00:07:09 +0200 Sven Luther wrote: > On Fri, Aug 18, 2006 at 12:04:51AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 23:09:12 +0200 Sven Luther wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 10:50:33PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > > > On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 22:00:18 +0200 Sven Luther wrote: > > > > > > > > > Erm, some guys tried to kick me out of debian for showing > > > > > unpoliteness, so please moderate your language here. > > > > > > > > ...and repeating over and over and over and over, like here! > > > > > > Well, we would not have been in this mess, if *YOU* had not > > > forced me to over and over and over and over mention the > > > ide-generic issue, > > > > Sure - me packaging yaird is to blame. Obvious! > > No, you failing to do a responsible job while maintaining yaird is to > blame. And this accusation is new? Or is it repetitive whining again? Repeating does not make your accusations more true, or more likely to be acknowledged. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ - Enden er nær: http://www.shibumi.org/eoti.htm pgpf35Kuui7Vs.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#383534: linux-image-2.6.14-2-k7: can't purge cleanly
Package: linux-image-2.6.14-2-k7 Severity: minor Purging configuration files for linux-image-2.6.14-2-k7 ... rmdir: /lib/modules/2.6.14-2-k7: Directory not empty dpkg - warning: while removing linux-image-2.6.14-2-k7, directory `/lib/modules/2.6.14-2-k7' not empty so not removed. $ cat /lib/modules/2.6.14-2-k7/modules.ofmap # of module name type compatible -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#383403: closed by maximilian attems <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Re: Bug#383403: linux-2.6: includes nondistributable and non-free binary firmware)
On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 11:43:52PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 21:39:00 +0200 Sven Luther wrote: > > > I am dubious though that the wiki page can easily be modified to look > > as nicely as the page larry provided, but then i am no wiki expert, > > so i will let others comment who are more wiki experts (jonas > > maybe ?). > > Beautification of wiki done! Euh, i meant, would it be possible to include the nice table larry had done into the wiki, sorry for not being clear enough. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#383403: closed by maximilian attems <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Re: Bug#383403: linux-2.6: includes nondistributable and non-free binary firmware)
On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 21:39:00 +0200 Sven Luther wrote: > I am dubious though that the wiki page can easily be modified to look > as nicely as the page larry provided, but then i am no wiki expert, > so i will let others comment who are more wiki experts (jonas > maybe ?). Beautification of wiki done! - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ - Enden er nær: http://www.shibumi.org/eoti.htm pgp48t3AEQ0C3.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#383403: closed by maximilian attems <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Re: Bug#383403: linux-2.6: includes nondistributable and non-free binary firmware)
On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 23:54:09 +0200 Sven Luther wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 11:43:52PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 21:39:00 +0200 Sven Luther wrote:
> >
> > > I am dubious though that the wiki page can easily be modified to
> > > look as nicely as the page larry provided, but then i am no wiki
> > > expert, so i will let others comment who are more wiki experts
> > > (jonas maybe ?).
> >
> > Beautification of wiki done!
>
> Euh, i meant, would it be possible to include the nice table larry
> had done into the wiki, sorry for not being clear enough.
Ah.
Add that text from Larry yourself to the wiki page, please. Just copy
as is, at the bottom of the page, surrounded by triple curly quotes -
like this:
{{{
Bla bla
yada yada
}}}
Then I might find time to beautify it later (or others might...)
- Jonas
--
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/
- Enden er nær: http://www.shibumi.org/eoti.htm
pgp3LgWy6QE8o.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: linux-2.6: includes nondistributable and non-free binary firmware
On Fri, Aug 18, 2006 at 12:21:51AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > On Fri, 18 Aug 2006 00:07:09 +0200 Sven Luther wrote: > > > On Fri, Aug 18, 2006 at 12:04:51AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > > On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 23:09:12 +0200 Sven Luther wrote: > > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 10:50:33PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 22:00:18 +0200 Sven Luther wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Erm, some guys tried to kick me out of debian for showing > > > > > > unpoliteness, so please moderate your language here. > > > > > > > > > > ...and repeating over and over and over and over, like here! > > > > > > > > Well, we would not have been in this mess, if *YOU* had not > > > > forced me to over and over and over and over mention the > > > > ide-generic issue, > > > > > > Sure - me packaging yaird is to blame. Obvious! > > > > No, you failing to do a responsible job while maintaining yaird is to > > blame. > > And this accusation is new? Or is it repetitive whining again? Nope, it just is. > Repeating does not make your accusations more true, or more likely to > be acknowledged. Well, we both know the truth of it, as do those that where present in erkelenz, or who followed the issue back in marsh. It was just some way to say, please don't be so harsh on larry, who has good intentions and actually did some work, not compared to others. /me still doesn't understand why you chose not to credit me though, while i actually did all the work back then, even if you deny it now. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#383403: closed by maximilian attems <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Re: Bug#383403: linux-2.6: includes nondistributable and non-free binary firmware)
On Fri, Aug 18, 2006 at 12:10:40AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 23:54:09 +0200 Sven Luther wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 11:43:52PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > > On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 21:39:00 +0200 Sven Luther wrote:
> > >
> > > > I am dubious though that the wiki page can easily be modified to
> > > > look as nicely as the page larry provided, but then i am no wiki
> > > > expert, so i will let others comment who are more wiki experts
> > > > (jonas maybe ?).
> > >
> > > Beautification of wiki done!
> >
> > Euh, i meant, would it be possible to include the nice table larry
> > had done into the wiki, sorry for not being clear enough.
>
> Ah.
>
> Add that text from Larry yourself to the wiki page, please. Just copy
> as is, at the bottom of the page, surrounded by triple curly quotes -
> like this:
>
> {{{
> Bla bla
>yada yada
> }}}
>
> Then I might find time to beautify it later (or others might...)
Done, i tried to do a little bit with the tables, but i guess the {{{ }}} goes
in the way.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: Re: Bug#383534: linux-image-2.6.14-2-k7: can't purge cleanly
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reassign 383534 linux-2.6 Bug#383534: linux-image-2.6.14-2-k7: can't purge cleanly Warning: Unknown package 'linux-image-2.6.14-2-k7' Bug reassigned from package `linux-image-2.6.14-2-k7' to `linux-2.6'. > -- 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#383403: closed by maximilian attems <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Re: Bug#383403: linux-2.6: includes nondistributable and non-free binary firmware)
On Fri, Aug 18, 2006 at 12:10:40AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 23:54:09 +0200 Sven Luther wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 11:43:52PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > > On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 21:39:00 +0200 Sven Luther wrote:
> > >
> > > > I am dubious though that the wiki page can easily be modified to
> > > > look as nicely as the page larry provided, but then i am no wiki
> > > > expert, so i will let others comment who are more wiki experts
> > > > (jonas maybe ?).
> > >
> > > Beautification of wiki done!
> >
> > Euh, i meant, would it be possible to include the nice table larry
> > had done into the wiki, sorry for not being clear enough.
>
> Ah.
>
> Add that text from Larry yourself to the wiki page, please. Just copy
> as is, at the bottom of the page, surrounded by triple curly quotes -
> like this:
>
> {{{
> Bla bla
>yada yada
> }}}
>
> Then I might find time to beautify it later (or others might...)
Will this not cause problem with the table ? This is the one which worries me.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: linux-2.6: includes nondistributable and non-free binary firmware
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >For each offending file, there are three possible solutions: >1. Get the author to release source code under a DFSG-free license >2. Move the firmware to non-free, patching the driver to use > request_firmware() >3. Delete the driver and firmware entirely. 4. Recognize that the project has been hostage of a few licensing kooks, tell them to fsck off and move on. >AFAIK, the best outcome yet from the relicensing discussions >on http://wiki.debian.org/KernelFirmwareLicensing is to properly >permit the redistribution of the binary, without source code. I consider it data, there no need for special arrangements to distribute the data of a GPL'ed program. -- ciao, Marco -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: linux-2.6: includes nondistributable and non-free binary firmware
On Fri, Aug 18, 2006 at 01:12:50AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >For each offending file, there are three possible solutions: > >1. Get the author to release source code under a DFSG-free license > >2. Move the firmware to non-free, patching the driver to use > > request_firmware() > >3. Delete the driver and firmware entirely. > 4. Recognize that the project has been hostage of a few licensing kooks, > tell them to fsck off and move on. I don't think the project need anymore such vulgarities, please try to stay polite, reread the social contract, and abide by what you agreed to when you joined debian. Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#380272: kernel-image-2.6-686-smp: cpqarray module fails to detect arrays
Hi Max, I just realized that I never tried your last suggestions. I will try them first thing when I get in to work tomorrow. I have received some more info about this bug. It appears to be a timing issue. Here is the link to the bug at kernel.org with an interesting suggestion (that I have not tried): http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6921. My company has inherited 5 racks of these compaq servers and it is very important that debian etch work well on them :) Thanks for all the help, Joshua Rubin pgpn5CcBtGYfx.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#242866: updated tg3.c patch
The most recent tg3.c patch posted here (by Herbert Xu on Tue, 11 May
2004) does not apply cleanly to linux-2.6.17. No surprise, a lot has
changed in the last two years. I applied it by hand (it wasn't hard),
and I can verify that the result (freshened patch attached) compiles
without error. I can also set up tg3 files for the firmware-nonfree
package, and supply kernel images for i386 and/or amd64. Testers?
- Larry
--- linux-2.6-2.6.17/drivers/net/tg3.c 2006-06-17 18:49:35.0 -0700
+++ linux-17-hack/drivers/net/tg3.c 2006-08-17 20:23:34.0 -0700
@@ -5,6 +5,7 @@
* Copyright (C) 2001, 2002, 2003 Jeff Garzik ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
* Copyright (C) 2004 Sun Microsystems Inc.
* Copyright (C) 2005 Broadcom Corporation.
+ * Portions copyright 2004 Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
*
* Firmware is:
* Derived from proprietary unpublished source code,
@@ -40,6 +41,8 @@
#include
#include
+#include
+
#include
#include
@@ -4813,130 +4816,6 @@
return 0;
}
-#define TG3_FW_RELEASE_MAJOR 0x0
-#define TG3_FW_RELASE_MINOR0x0
-#define TG3_FW_RELEASE_FIX 0x0
-#define TG3_FW_START_ADDR 0x0800
-#define TG3_FW_TEXT_ADDR 0x0800
-#define TG3_FW_TEXT_LEN0x9c0
-#define TG3_FW_RODATA_ADDR 0x080009c0
-#define TG3_FW_RODATA_LEN 0x60
-#define TG3_FW_DATA_ADDR 0x08000a40
-#define TG3_FW_DATA_LEN0x20
-#define TG3_FW_SBSS_ADDR 0x08000a60
-#define TG3_FW_SBSS_LEN0xc
-#define TG3_FW_BSS_ADDR0x08000a70
-#define TG3_FW_BSS_LEN 0x10
-
-static u32 tg3FwText[(TG3_FW_TEXT_LEN / sizeof(u32)) + 1] = {
- 0x, 0x1003, 0x, 0x000d, 0x000d, 0x3c1d0800,
- 0x37bd3ffc, 0x03a0f021, 0x3c100800, 0x2610, 0x0e18, 0x,
- 0x000d, 0x3c1d0800, 0x37bd3ffc, 0x03a0f021, 0x3c100800, 0x26100034,
- 0x0e00021c, 0x, 0x000d, 0x, 0x, 0x,
- 0x27bdffe0, 0x3c1cc000, 0xafbf0018, 0xaf80680c, 0x0e4c, 0x241b2105,
- 0x9785, 0x97870002, 0x9782002c, 0x9783002e, 0x3c040800, 0x248409c0,
- 0xafa00014, 0x00021400, 0x00621825, 0x00052c00, 0xafa30010, 0x8f860010,
- 0x00e52825, 0x0e60, 0x24070102, 0x3c02ac00, 0x34420100, 0x3c03ac01,
- 0x34630100, 0xaf820490, 0x3c02, 0xaf820494, 0xaf830498, 0xaf82049c,
- 0x24020001, 0xaf825ce0, 0x0e3f, 0xaf825d00, 0x0e000140, 0x,
- 0x8fbf0018, 0x03e8, 0x27bd0020, 0x2402, 0xaf825404, 0x8f835400,
- 0x34630400, 0xaf835400, 0xaf825404, 0x3c020800, 0x24420034, 0xaf82541c,
- 0x03e8, 0xaf805400, 0x, 0x, 0x3c020800, 0x34423000,
- 0x3c030800, 0x34633000, 0x3c040800, 0x348437ff, 0x3c010800, 0xac220a64,
- 0x24020040, 0x3c010800, 0xac220a68, 0x3c010800, 0xac200a60, 0xac60,
- 0x24630004, 0x0083102b, 0x5040fffd, 0xac60, 0x03e8, 0x,
- 0x00804821, 0x8faa0010, 0x3c020800, 0x8c420a60, 0x3c040800, 0x8c840a68,
- 0x8fab0014, 0x24430001, 0x0044102b, 0x3c010800, 0xac230a60, 0x1443,
- 0x4021, 0x3c010800, 0xac200a60, 0x3c020800, 0x8c420a60, 0x3c030800,
- 0x8c630a64, 0x9124, 0x00021140, 0x00431021, 0x00481021, 0x25080001,
- 0xa044, 0x29020008, 0x1440fff4, 0x25290001, 0x3c020800, 0x8c420a60,
- 0x3c030800, 0x8c630a64, 0x8f84680c, 0x00021140, 0x00431021, 0xac440008,
- 0xac45000c, 0xac460010, 0xac470014, 0xac4a0018, 0x03e8, 0xac4b001c,
- 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
- 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
- 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
- 0x0208, 0x, 0x0a0001e3, 0x3c0a0001, 0x0a0001e3, 0x3c0a0002,
- 0x0a0001e3, 0x, 0x0a0001e3, 0x, 0x0a0001e3, 0x,
- 0x0a0001e3, 0x, 0x0a0001e3, 0x, 0x0a0001e3, 0x,
- 0x0a0001e3, 0x, 0x0a0001e3, 0x, 0x0a0001e3, 0x,
- 0x0a0001e3, 0x3c0a0007, 0x0a0001e3, 0x3c0a0008, 0x0a0001e3, 0x3c0a0009,
- 0x0a0001e3, 0x, 0x0a0001e3, 0x, 0x0a0001e3, 0x3c0a000b,
- 0x0a0001e3, 0x3c0a000c, 0x0a0001e3, 0x3c0a000d, 0x0a0001e3, 0x,
- 0x0a0001e3, 0x, 0x0a0001e3, 0x3c0a000e, 0x0a0001e3, 0x,
- 0x0a0001e3, 0x, 0x0a0001e3, 0x, 0x0a0001e3, 0x,
- 0x0a0001e3, 0x, 0x0a0001e3, 0x, 0x0a0001e3, 0x,
- 0x0a0001e3, 0x, 0x0a0001e3, 0x3c0a0013, 0x0a0001e3, 0x3c0a0014,
- 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
- 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
- 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
- 0x27bdffe0, 0x1821, 0x1021, 0xafbf0018, 0xafb10014, 0xafb00010,
- 0x3c010800, 0x00220821, 0xac200a70, 0x3c010800, 0x00220821, 0xac200a74,
- 0x3c010800, 0x00220821, 0xac200a78, 0x2463
Bug#383582: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686: suspend doesn't work with 2.6.17
Package: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686 Version: 2.6.17-6 Severity: normal I upgraded from linux-image-2.6.16-2-686 to linux-image-2.6.17-2-686, and suspend no longer works on my Dell Latitude X1 using "echo -n mem > /sys/power/state". It worked great with 2.6.16-2-686. -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable APT prefers testing APT policy: (999, 'testing'), (80, 'unstable') Architecture: i386 (i686) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.17-2-686 Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Versions of packages linux-image-2.6.17-2-686 depends on: ii initramfs-tools [linux-initra 0.73e tools for generating an initramfs ii module-init-tools 3.2.2-3tools for managing Linux kernel mo Versions of packages linux-image-2.6.17-2-686 recommends: ii libc6-i6862.3.6-15 GNU C Library: Shared libraries [i -- debconf information: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/postinst/old-initrd-link-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/postinst/old-dir-initrd-link-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/preinst/lilo-initrd-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/preinst/failed-to-move-modules-2.6.17-2-686: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/postinst/really-run-bootloader-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/postinst/depmod-error-initrd-2.6.17-2-686: false linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/postinst/create-kimage-link-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/postinst/bootloader-test-error-2.6.17-2-686: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/preinst/lilo-has-ramdisk: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/prerm/removing-running-kernel-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/preinst/abort-overwrite-2.6.17-2-686: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/preinst/already-running-this-2.6.17-2-686: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/postinst/old-system-map-link-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/preinst/bootloader-initrd-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/preinst/initrd-2.6.17-2-686: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/preinst/abort-install-2.6.17-2-686: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/preinst/overwriting-modules-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/postinst/kimage-is-a-directory: linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/preinst/elilo-initrd-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/prerm/would-invalidate-boot-loader-2.6.17-2-686: true linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/postinst/depmod-error-2.6.17-2-686: false linux-image-2.6.17-2-686/postinst/bootloader-error-2.6.17-2-686: -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
