Re: radeon graphic speed regression 2.4 -> 2.6 test7 benh
On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 23:39, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > It is not synthetic. It feels really sluggish in the shell compared to > > 2.4... Also I have CONFIG_PREEMPT enabled and now I do wonder that I did > > not yet see a random crash - hmmhhh well except for a try to get > > cryptoloop working. That was reliably crashing. > > > > Should I go for the old radeon driver ?! > > No, same problem I'm sure. Just disable CONFIG_PREEMPT, and make sure > you are using the kernel's AGP and DRI drivers (they do help for 2D on > ATIs) Keep in mind, that I am using a dualhead configuration so usually dri/agp/drm is not used. However I just tried a single head config and while it is crashing in agp 4x mode it is working as fast as expected with drm/dri/agp 1x... However this is of no use for me as I need both heads. But I don't see why it became so much slower in 2.6.0-test ... Soeren
Re: [patch] turn off backlight on 12" pbook
On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 23:20, Michael Schmitz wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 28, 2003 at 03:59:11PM +0100, Guido Guenther wrote: > > > although it can't handle brightness at the moment. Patch is against > > > 2.4.22-ben2. > > A slightly updated version (that additionally turns off the backlight at > > level == 0) can be found at: > > http://honk.physik.uni-konstanz.de/~agx/linux-ppc/kernel/rivafb-blank.diff > > Thanks, I'll try that on the flat panel iMac, and work it into 2.6.0 as > well. If any of you has a MacOS 9 capable machine with flat panel, I want to see if we can get the actual finer backlight control to work. With MacOS 9, you can easily trace things with MacsBug, so let me know if you have that setup at hand, we can do some register digging... Ben
Re: radeon graphic speed regression 2.4 -> 2.6 test7 benh
On Thu, 2003-10-30 at 14:04, P Oscar Boykin wrote: > On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 09:11:16AM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > I doubt that even a working CONFIG_PREEMPT would make any good > > difference. Kernel preemption is just a crappy feature to please > > lame slashdotters > > > > Ben. > > Are you joking? I have heard that it is a pretty good feature for > audio recording and other applications that need as close to real-time > performance as possible (I guess live video processing, recording, > etc...) > > Why do you say it is a crappy feature? Not the place to argue about it here, but I'd rather continue fixing the kernel latency problems if any (we did fix a lot recently) that just preempting when in kernel space. Also, that force all of the SMP stuffs on UP kernels, thus slightly increasing overall kernel overhead on non-SMP setups. Ben.
Re: radeon graphic speed regression 2.4 -> 2.6 test7 benh
On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 09:11:16AM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > I doubt that even a working CONFIG_PREEMPT would make any good > difference. Kernel preemption is just a crappy feature to please > lame slashdotters > > Ben. Are you joking? I have heard that it is a pretty good feature for audio recording and other applications that need as close to real-time performance as possible (I guess live video processing, recording, etc...) Why do you say it is a crappy feature? POB. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://pobox.com/~boykinjabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] fingerprint=D250 4AD9 4544 B7D2 A17C 911D D608 D387 6718 D75F copyleft is good for you: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/pragmatic.html pgp1p88DjTtg8.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Powerbook G4: Linux does not boot again
Hello Luca, On Wed, Oct 29, 2003 at 08:31:21PM +0100, Luca Padovani wrote: > > Hi everybody, > > I'm quoting an old thread 'cause a similar thing just happened to me. I > can't boot Debian Linux anymore :-( > It started just after having used MacOSX for a couple of hours. After > that, Linux (kernel 2.4.21 ben2) doesn't boot, it just prints 15/20 lines > during startup and then the machine switches off. I had the same problem - an up-to-date kernel solved it ;) > > Thanks in advance, You're wellcome Good luck -- M.f.G. Georg Koss mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 2.6.0-test7 (benh) cpufreq problem?
Hi Michel, On Wed, Oct 29, 2003 at 09:22:44PM +0100, Mich Lanners wrote: > On 28 Oct, this message from Georg Koss echoed through cyberspace: > > I own an PBG412. >^^ > > > [snip] > > 3.) That plan B video stuff has to be disabled. > > Why do you want to use PlanB on your PowerBook? That driver is for old > PCI macs with a video input. > > And yes, as you found out, it doesn't work (it doesn't even compile) on > current 2.6 kernels. It was my intention just to comment this for PBG412 - if that's clear to most people I apologize for generating noise. THX for interest and have a famous day -- M.f.G. Georg Koss mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: radeon graphic speed regression 2.4 -> 2.6 test7 benh
On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 23:30, Soeren Sonnenburg wrote: > On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 18:00, Michel Dänzer wrote: > > On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 09:51, Soeren Sonnenburg wrote: > > > On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 09:43, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > > > > > > > You may be encountering a different issue ... (2.6 is usually overall > > > > faster than 2.4 here, though I haven't timed gnome-terminal > > > > specifically) > > > > > > it is not gnome-terminal but multi-gnome-terminal which is more like > > > xterm. So no antialiasing -> much faster. > > > > BTW, are you using AGP GART? You need to load the uninorth-agp module > > for that with 2.6, agpgart is no longer enough. The pathetic performance > > of PCI GART on newer machines might explain what you're seeing. > > Indeed not. But I just tried, no change in results... So the server log showed it to use PCI GART before but AGP GART afterwards? > isn't agp needed for 3d stuff only anyway ? When the DRI is enabled, the GART is also used for 2D acceleration, so PCI GART will slow it down as well. -- Earthling Michel Dänzer | Debian (powerpc), X and DRI developer Software libre enthusiast| http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=daenzer
Re: radeon graphic speed regression 2.4 -> 2.6 test7 benh
On Thu, 2003-10-30 at 00:04, Vincent Bernat wrote: > OoO Peu avant le début de l'après-midi du mercredi 29 octobre 2003, > vers 13:46, Michel Dänzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> disait: > > >> > CONFIG_PREEMPT might make a difference, pity it causes crashes and all > >> > around weird behaviour about as soon as RAM is fully used. > >> > >> I use CONFIG_PREEMPT and got random segfaults ont some apps, including > >> X. My RAM is not full (well, it is but most of it is cached > >> memory). > > > That's what I mean by 'fully used'. > > >> Is it related ? > > > Probably. > > Is there a way to dynamically disable preempt (a sysctl key ?). No, you'll have to rebuild the kernel and modules. -- Earthling Michel Dänzer | Debian (powerpc), X and DRI developer Software libre enthusiast| http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=daenzer
Re: radeon graphic speed regression 2.4 -> 2.6 test7 benh
OoO Peu avant le début de l'après-midi du mercredi 29 octobre 2003, vers 13:46, Michel Dänzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> disait: >> > CONFIG_PREEMPT might make a difference, pity it causes crashes and all >> > around weird behaviour about as soon as RAM is fully used. >> >> I use CONFIG_PREEMPT and got random segfaults ont some apps, including >> X. My RAM is not full (well, it is but most of it is cached >> memory). > That's what I mean by 'fully used'. >> Is it related ? > Probably. Is there a way to dynamically disable preempt (a sysctl key ?). -- BOFH excuse #241: _Rosin_ core solder? But...
Re: radeon graphic speed regression 2.4 -> 2.6 test7 benh
> It is not synthetic. It feels really sluggish in the shell compared to > 2.4... Also I have CONFIG_PREEMPT enabled and now I do wonder that I did > not yet see a random crash - hmmhhh well except for a try to get > cryptoloop working. That was reliably crashing. > > Should I go for the old radeon driver ?! No, same problem I'm sure. Just disable CONFIG_PREEMPT, and make sure you are using the kernel's AGP and DRI drivers (they do help for 2D on ATIs) Ben.
Re: radeon graphic speed regression 2.4 -> 2.6 test7 benh
> Maybe I'm a lame slashdotter then. :) In my experience it enhances > interactivity considerably. Hrm... well... _maybe_, though at the expense of overall perfs. Ben.
Re: radeon graphic speed regression 2.4 -> 2.6 test7 benh
On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 17:56, Michel Dänzer wrote: > On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 17:39, Soeren Sonnenburg wrote: > > On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 17:28, Michel Dänzer wrote: > > > On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 09:51, Soeren Sonnenburg wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 09:43, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > > > > > > > > > You may be encountering a different issue ... (2.6 is usually overall > > > > > faster than 2.4 here, > > > > > > Same here. Soeren, have you verified the difference actually is related > > > to X, e.g. by redirecting the output to a file? Did you conduct both > > > tests as soon after bootup as possible to minimize the influence of > > > caching? ... > > > > Yes fresh reboot - both this morning. > > A time find ./ >/dev/null says on 2.6. : > > time find >/dev/null > > > > real4m27.772s > > user0m0.855s > > sys 0m11.292s > > > > while it seems slower than 2.4 (not yet tested) it does not justify the > > 28minutes to display the files :-/ > > Weird. Maybe this (rather synthetic BTW - it doesn't feel slow doing > 'real' work, does it?) test tickles very bad behaviour in something > which has changed radically in the 2.6 kernel, the scheduler maybe? > CONFIG_PREEMPT might make a difference, pity it causes crashes and all > around weird behaviour about as soon as RAM is fully used. It is not synthetic. It feels really sluggish in the shell compared to 2.4... Also I have CONFIG_PREEMPT enabled and now I do wonder that I did not yet see a random crash - hmmhhh well except for a try to get cryptoloop working. That was reliably crashing. Should I go for the old radeon driver ?! Soeren
Re: radeon graphic speed regression 2.4 -> 2.6 test7 benh
On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 18:00, Michel Dänzer wrote: > On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 09:51, Soeren Sonnenburg wrote: > > On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 09:43, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > > > > > You may be encountering a different issue ... (2.6 is usually overall > > > faster than 2.4 here, though I haven't timed gnome-terminal specifically) > > > > it is not gnome-terminal but multi-gnome-terminal which is more like > > xterm. So no antialiasing -> much faster. > > BTW, are you using AGP GART? You need to load the uninorth-agp module > for that with 2.6, agpgart is no longer enough. The pathetic performance > of PCI GART on newer machines might explain what you're seeing. Indeed not. But I just tried, no change in results... isn't agp needed for 3d stuff only anyway ? Soeren.
Re: radeon graphic speed regression 2.4 -> 2.6 test7 benh
On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 23:11, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > Weird. Maybe this (rather synthetic BTW - it doesn't feel slow doing > > 'real' work, does it?) test tickles very bad behaviour in something > > which has changed radically in the 2.6 kernel, the scheduler maybe? > > CONFIG_PREEMPT might make a difference, pity it causes crashes and all > > around weird behaviour about as soon as RAM is fully used. > > I doubt that even a working CONFIG_PREEMPT would make any good > difference. Kernel preemption is just a crappy feature to please > lame slashdotters Maybe I'm a lame slashdotter then. :) In my experience it enhances interactivity considerably. -- Earthling Michel Dänzer | Debian (powerpc), X and DRI developer Software libre enthusiast| http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=daenzer
Re: radeon graphic speed regression 2.4 -> 2.6 test7 benh
> Weird. Maybe this (rather synthetic BTW - it doesn't feel slow doing > 'real' work, does it?) test tickles very bad behaviour in something > which has changed radically in the 2.6 kernel, the scheduler maybe? > CONFIG_PREEMPT might make a difference, pity it causes crashes and all > around weird behaviour about as soon as RAM is fully used. I doubt that even a working CONFIG_PREEMPT would make any good difference. Kernel preemption is just a crappy feature to please lame slashdotters Ben.
Installing Debian on the new Tibook
I am trying to install Debian on the new 15in TiPowerbook. I found your article on installing on an iBook by Branden Robinson http://people.debian.org/~branden/ibook/ and I followed it to the exactly for doing a dual boot between Linux and OS X. However when I start the install from Open firmware and I get to the Debian install, it can't detect any physical disks. When I run mac-fdisk it only see's the apple partition map. please help, I'm lost. Thanks, Bryan __ Do you Yahoo!? Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/
Re: radeon graphic speed regression 2.4 -> 2.6 test7 benh
On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 19:22, Vincent Bernat wrote: > OoO En ce doux début de matinée du mercredi 29 octobre 2003, vers > 08:56, Michel Dänzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> disait: > > > CONFIG_PREEMPT might make a difference, pity it causes crashes and all > > around weird behaviour about as soon as RAM is fully used. > > I use CONFIG_PREEMPT and got random segfaults ont some apps, including > X. My RAM is not full (well, it is but most of it is cached > memory). That's what I mean by 'fully used'. > Is it related ? Probably. -- Earthling Michel Dänzer | Debian (powerpc), X and DRI developer Software libre enthusiast| http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=daenzer
Re: 2.6.0-test7 (benh) cpufreq problem?
On 28 Oct, this message from Georg Koss echoed through cyberspace: > I own an PBG412. ^^ Hmmm... > I rsynced 2.6.0-test7 from source.mvista.com and compiled that kernel, > which worked with two minor problems. > [snip] > 3.) That plan B video stuff has to be disabled. Why do you want to use PlanB on your PowerBook? That driver is for old PCI macs with a video input. And yes, as you found out, it doesn't work (it doesn't even compile) on current 2.6 kernels. Cheers Michel - Michel Lanners | " Read Philosophy. Study Art. 23, Rue Paul Henkes|Ask Questions. Make Mistakes. L-1710 Luxembourg | email [EMAIL PROTECTED]| http://www.cpu.lu/~mlan| Learn Always. "
Powerbook G4: Linux does not boot again
Hi everybody, I'm quoting an old thread 'cause a similar thing just happened to me. I can't boot Debian Linux anymore :-( It started just after having used MacOSX for a couple of hours. After that, Linux (kernel 2.4.21 ben2) doesn't boot, it just prints 15/20 lines during startup and then the machine switches off. The old kernel (2.4.18 ben1) goes a little further, but it hangs at some point before it has finished starting up the services. The only thing I was able to do was to get a root shell (the second time I try to boot the old kernel fsck gives me the chance to get it) and have a look around. The file system seems OK, I've also reinstalled the new kernel and re-run ybin but nothing changed. One thing that is in common with the problem Wolfgang had is that the time is reset to january 1st 1970 every time I try to boot, don't know if this matters. Tried COMMAND+ALT+P+R with no luck, tried video=ofonly with both kernels with no luck, no more ideas left. Any help would be greatly appreciated, and if I missed any info that might be useful please ask! Thanks in advance, -- luca
Re: radeon graphic speed regression 2.4 -> 2.6 test7 benh
OoO En ce doux début de matinée du mercredi 29 octobre 2003, vers 08:56, Michel Dänzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> disait: > Weird. Maybe this (rather synthetic BTW - it doesn't feel slow doing > 'real' work, does it?) test tickles very bad behaviour in something > which has changed radically in the 2.6 kernel, the scheduler maybe? > CONFIG_PREEMPT might make a difference, pity it causes crashes and all > around weird behaviour about as soon as RAM is fully used. I use CONFIG_PREEMPT and got random segfaults ont some apps, including X. My RAM is not full (well, it is but most of it is cached memory). Is it related ? -- I WILL NOT CARVE GODS I WILL NOT CARVE GODS I WILL NOT CARVE GODS -+- Bart Simpson on chalkboard in episode 8F11
Re: prerequisites for debian-installer image upload
On Wed, Oct 29, 2003 at 05:25:02PM +, Colin Watson wrote: > On Tue, Oct 28, 2003 at 07:24:26PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote: > > debian-powerpc: > > > > My plan is to only have the debian-installer package list i386 and > > powerpc as its architectures at first, and add more architectures later > > as they are ready. It should be possible to autobuild the images on at > > least some autobuilders. Last week I asked for my package to be test > > built on powerpc, and got two failure reports, but no followup. I would > > like to get in touch with someone who runs the powerpc autobuilder and > > make sure the package will build there. > > I'm not running an autobuilder, but I do have a freshly installed > powerpc system, so I've been playing build-monkey for Joey's fixes on > IRC today. The situation's improving. It builds now. I'll try to test the result somehow tonight (can I just dump the cdrom bits onto an HFS volume and boot from that?). -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: prerequisites for debian-installer image upload
Joey Hess wrote: > I'm trying to get an upload of the debian-installer boot images > (everything except CD) into the Debian archive, similar to how the > boot-floppies used to go into the archive. I think that this will be > increasingly important as we begin to stabalize d-i before release, and > now is not too soon to start working on it. I've cc'd debian-cd and > debian-powerpc because of some unresolved issues: > > debian-powerpc: > > My plan is to only have the debian-installer package list i386 and > powerpc as its architectures at first, and add more architectures later > as they are ready. It should be possible to autobuild the images on at > least some autobuilders. Last week I asked for my package to be test > built on powerpc, and got two failure reports, but no followup. I would > like to get in touch with someone who runs the powerpc autobuilder and > make sure the package will build there. Thanks to Colin Watson, this is sorted out. A newer build of the package for both i386 and powerpc is at http://kitenet.net/~joey/tmp/d-i/ -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: prerequisites for debian-installer image upload
On Tue, Oct 28, 2003 at 07:24:26PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote: > debian-powerpc: > > My plan is to only have the debian-installer package list i386 and > powerpc as its architectures at first, and add more architectures later > as they are ready. It should be possible to autobuild the images on at > least some autobuilders. Last week I asked for my package to be test > built on powerpc, and got two failure reports, but no followup. I would > like to get in touch with someone who runs the powerpc autobuilder and > make sure the package will build there. I'm not running an autobuilder, but I do have a freshly installed powerpc system, so I've been playing build-monkey for Joey's fixes on IRC today. The situation's improving. -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
apt-get install mozilla-browser is broken in sid
Hey All, I went to upgrade galeon today, and now I'm getting relocation errors: Setting up mozilla-browser (1.5-2) ... Updating mozilla chrome registry...regxpcom: relocation error: /usr/lib/mozilla/components/libnsgif.so: undefined symbol: NS_NewGenericModule__FPCcUiP21nsModuleComponentInfoPFP9nsIModule_vPP9nsIModule E: regxpcom was exited: 127 regchrome: relocation error: /usr/lib/mozilla/components/libnsgif.so: undefined symbol: NS_NewGenericModule__FPCcUiP21nsModuleComponentInfoPFP9nsIModule_vPP9nsIModule E: regchrome was exited: 127 mv: cannot stat `/usr/lib/mozilla/chrome/*.rdf': No such file or directory done. I get the same relocation error trying to start galeon itself. I've googled for a few hours for various problems with regxpcom, but nothing has helped. Any ideas? Thanks, jas.
subscribe
subscribe
Re: radeon graphic speed regression 2.4 -> 2.6 test7 benh
On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 09:51, Soeren Sonnenburg wrote: > On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 09:43, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > > > You may be encountering a different issue ... (2.6 is usually overall > > faster than 2.4 here, though I haven't timed gnome-terminal specifically) > > it is not gnome-terminal but multi-gnome-terminal which is more like > xterm. So no antialiasing -> much faster. BTW, are you using AGP GART? You need to load the uninorth-agp module for that with 2.6, agpgart is no longer enough. The pathetic performance of PCI GART on newer machines might explain what you're seeing. -- Earthling Michel Dänzer | Debian (powerpc), X and DRI developer Software libre enthusiast| http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=daenzer
Re: radeon graphic speed regression 2.4 -> 2.6 test7 benh
On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 17:39, Soeren Sonnenburg wrote: > On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 17:28, Michel Dänzer wrote: > > On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 09:51, Soeren Sonnenburg wrote: > > > On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 09:43, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > > > > > > > You may be encountering a different issue ... (2.6 is usually overall > > > > faster than 2.4 here, > > > > Same here. Soeren, have you verified the difference actually is related > > to X, e.g. by redirecting the output to a file? Did you conduct both > > tests as soon after bootup as possible to minimize the influence of > > caching? ... > > Yes fresh reboot - both this morning. > A time find ./ >/dev/null says on 2.6. : > time find >/dev/null > > real 4m27.772s > user 0m0.855s > sys 0m11.292s > > while it seems slower than 2.4 (not yet tested) it does not justify the > 28minutes to display the files :-/ Weird. Maybe this (rather synthetic BTW - it doesn't feel slow doing 'real' work, does it?) test tickles very bad behaviour in something which has changed radically in the 2.6 kernel, the scheduler maybe? CONFIG_PREEMPT might make a difference, pity it causes crashes and all around weird behaviour about as soon as RAM is fully used. -- Earthling Michel Dänzer | Debian (powerpc), X and DRI developer Software libre enthusiast| http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=daenzer
Re: radeon graphic speed regression 2.4 -> 2.6 test7 benh
On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 17:28, Michel Dänzer wrote: > On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 09:51, Soeren Sonnenburg wrote: > > On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 09:43, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > > > > > You may be encountering a different issue ... (2.6 is usually overall > > > faster than 2.4 here, > > Same here. Soeren, have you verified the difference actually is related > to X, e.g. by redirecting the output to a file? Did you conduct both > tests as soon after bootup as possible to minimize the influence of > caching? ... Yes fresh reboot - both this morning. A time find ./ >/dev/null says on 2.6. : time find >/dev/null real4m27.772s user0m0.855s sys 0m11.292s while it seems slower than 2.4 (not yet tested) it does not justify the 28minutes to display the files :-/ Soeren.
Re: radeon graphic speed regression 2.4 -> 2.6 test7 benh
On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 09:51, Soeren Sonnenburg wrote: > On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 09:43, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > > > You may be encountering a different issue ... (2.6 is usually overall > > faster than 2.4 here, Same here. Soeren, have you verified the difference actually is related to X, e.g. by redirecting the output to a file? Did you conduct both tests as soon after bootup as possible to minimize the influence of caching? ... > > though I haven't timed gnome-terminal specifically) > > it is not gnome-terminal but multi-gnome-terminal which is more like > xterm. So no antialiasing -> much faster. I'm using non-AA fonts in gnome-terminal 2.4, thanks to fontconfig. -- Earthling Michel Dänzer | Debian (powerpc), X and DRI developer Software libre enthusiast| http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=daenzer
Re: PPC waste compilation
Nevermind. I had to re-write the crappy makefile. Now it compiles perfectly on the PPC. If anyone wants the Makefile to start your own private p2p network on your ppc, let me know. -- wcrowshaw
prerequisites for debian-installer image upload
I'm trying to get an upload of the debian-installer boot images (everything except CD) into the Debian archive, similar to how the boot-floppies used to go into the archive. I think that this will be increasingly important as we begin to stabalize d-i before release, and now is not too soon to start working on it. I've cc'd debian-cd and debian-powerpc because of some unresolved issues: debian-powerpc: My plan is to only have the debian-installer package list i386 and powerpc as its architectures at first, and add more architectures later as they are ready. It should be possible to autobuild the images on at least some autobuilders. Last week I asked for my package to be test built on powerpc, and got two failure reports, but no followup. I would like to get in touch with someone who runs the powerpc autobuilder and make sure the package will build there. debian-cd: What kinds of images do you use/need from the debian-installer tree for building CDs on the various architectures? There is both an initrd image, and a CD boot "floppy" image, and I do not want to waste space in the archive with both if they are not both needed on a given architecture. Last week I disabled shipping the initrd image, and this apparently broke CD builds on i386. It looks like the CD for i386 includes both the CD "floppy" and a cdrom.gz that looks like a renamed version of our CD initrd. Surely these are not both necessary? The CD also currently contains the d-i floppy-initrd.gz (in install/), and I do not understand how this can possibly be of use, but my removal of that initrd from the debian-installer daily builds also seemed to break the CD builds. We will also eventually need to figure out if and how CD images should be built against the d-i images that will eventually be in the archive, as opposed to against the daily builds. And all the filenames of the various images d-i produces are due for an overhaul that will break your build scripts. Just a heads up for now on that. -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: OT - worm problem
On Wed, Oct 29, 2003 at 08:29:04AM -0500, Joshua Narins wrote: > Isn't there some smart debian person who could figure out where this > is coming from? An awful lot of random infected Windows machines, I strongly suspect. There Is No Cabal. Cheers, -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: OT - worm problem
> Not sure if you're using a POP 3 account but I've been using mailfilter > to delete these from the server prior to download with fetchmail and it > works pretty well. Let me know if you want the rc file off list. Even > if you aren't using POP3, you may be able to adapt it for filtering in > Exim. I'd be interested in the rc file myself. Isn't there some smart debian person who could figure out where this is coming from? On the one hand, it might be an infected subscriber, on the other, it might be harassment from a cabal of anti-debian-on-powerpc saboteurs. -Josh
openfirmware question (firmware 1.2 before 256mb upgrade on iMac CRT)
Greetings, I've figured out that one should press alt-museum-o-f to boot into OpenFirmware. However, I cannot figure out which command would positively confirm whether this 333 MHz iMac CRT has the required firmware upgrade 1.2 needed to access 256mb memory modules. Could anyone enlighten me as to how I could verify this? Thanks! -- Martin-Éric Racine, ICT Consultant http://www.pp.fishpool.fi/~q-funk/
Re: [patch] turn off backlight on 12" pbook
> On Tue, Oct 28, 2003 at 03:59:11PM +0100, Guido Guenther wrote: > > although it can't handle brightness at the moment. Patch is against > > 2.4.22-ben2. > A slightly updated version (that additionally turns off the backlight at > level == 0) can be found at: > http://honk.physik.uni-konstanz.de/~agx/linux-ppc/kernel/rivafb-blank.diff Thanks, I'll try that on the flat panel iMac, and work it into 2.6.0 as well. Michael
Re: radeon graphic speed regression 2.4 -> 2.6 test7 benh
On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 09:43, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 18:03, Soeren Sonnenburg wrote: > > > also the system load was noticably higher in 2.6 (the sysload applet was > > completely filled while it was maybe 1/3 filled in 2.4) > > While the radeon driver can make a difference in console (2.6 version > isn't accelerated), it has no impact on X acceleration. hmmhh. would the 'old' radeon driver be accelerated on console... Then I would try it out if it is still working on 2.6... > You may be encountering a different issue ... (2.6 is usually overall > faster than 2.4 here, though I haven't timed gnome-terminal specifically) it is not gnome-terminal but multi-gnome-terminal which is more like xterm. So no antialiasing -> much faster. Soeren.
Re: 2.6.0-test7 (benh) cpufreq problem?
> It's similar to what I reported a time ago after a MacOSX-upgrade (Panther). > Benjamin Herrenschmidt recommended to upgrade my 2.4.* kernel which > solved the problem, which, as he explained short, was in some context > with cpufreq. No, the problem must be different. The fix that went into 2.4 was first developped in 2.6 ;) Try adding "printkbtext" to your command line to get some more debug output Ben.
Re: radeon graphic speed regression 2.4 -> 2.6 test7 benh
On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 18:03, Soeren Sonnenburg wrote: > also the system load was noticably higher in 2.6 (the sysload applet was > completely filled while it was maybe 1/3 filled in 2.4) While the radeon driver can make a difference in console (2.6 version isn't accelerated), it has no impact on X acceleration. You may be encountering a different issue ... (2.6 is usually overall faster than 2.4 here, though I haven't timed gnome-terminal specifically) Ben.
radeon graphic speed regression 2.4 -> 2.6 test7 benh
Hi... As I am now on 2.6.0-test7 using the new radeon driver I realized that the scrolling speed in a multi-gnome-terminal is approx. 8 times slower than with 2.4. to test I used just time find ./ in my home directory and it took real4m29.802s user0m1.230s sys 0m7.830s on 2.4.23 something and real32m51.384s user0m3.884s sys 0m22.022s on 2.6. also the system load was noticably higher in 2.6 (the sysload applet was completely filled while it was maybe 1/3 filled in 2.4) Who knows the cause ? Soeren.
