Re: Bug#249048: debian-installer-demo: can't load module in installer, sparc
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >* Robert Lemmen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-05-14 19:02]: >> loading module 'ide-cd' for 'Linux ATAPI CD-ROM' >> Error while running 'modprobe -v ide-cd' >> >> if i run modprobe in a console i get: >> ELF file ... not for this architecture >> >> if i run file on it i get: > >Which machine do you have? Do you know which kernel this netinst >image contained? Do any other modules show this problem? Known problem, recently fixed in busybox. The 2004-05-11 sid d-i daily images (as should later ones) have the fix, it hasn't yet made it to the sarge images. -- Blars Blarson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.blars.org/blars.html With Microsoft, failure is not an option. It is a standard feature.
Re: Bug#248963: Sarge Debian-installer installation error on SPARC IPX
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >* Magnus Hyllander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-05-14 20:46]: >> Booting with "linux ramdisk_size=8192" gets me past the previous >> problem. Now I get other errors just a little later during initial boot: >> >> Freeing unused kernel memory: 132k freed >> Setting up filesystem, please wait ... >> echo[8]: Unimplemented SPARC system call 188 >> mount[9]: Unimplemented SPARC system call 188 >> uname[11]: Unimplemented SPARC system call 188 >> grep[12]: Unimplemented SPARC system call 188 >> init[10]: Unimplemented SPARC system call 188 >> [[13]: Unimplemented SPARC system call 188 >> Segmentation fault >> BusyBox v1.00-pre10 (Debian 20040415-3) multi-call binary > >And idea? This is one of the possible symtoms of the bterm/sparc framebuffer bug. Try adding the "debian-installer/framebuffer=false" option to the silo command line. -- Blars Blarson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.blars.org/blars.html With Microsoft, failure is not an option. It is a standard feature.
Re: RAID and 2.2
On Friday 14 May 2004 16:33, Andrew Sharp wrote: > Yeah, there were patches available. I don't know if there were any > in the package archive, but I tried that that exact thing on that > exact machine. Be very careful, as that code had a nasty tendency to > wipe out the disk label on one or more of the disks in question for > some configurations. Everything would run fine until you did a > reboot. It was a sparc only thing. I believe that there were work > arounds involving modifying your configuration or partitioning > slightly, so you may have to rebuild anyway. That's strange. I've noticed that issue with 2.4, and possibly 2.6. Should it still be happening? It seems to be fine if I restore the disklabel and reboot, then the RAID volume comes up just fine. Also, I haven't had the problem with 2.6.6 yet, so that's good. Pat -- Purdue University ITAP/RCS--- http://www.itap.purdue.edu/rcs/ The Computer Refuge --- http://computer-refuge.org
Re: RAID and 2.2
On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 11:10:36PM +0200, Frank Gevaerts wrote: > Hi, > > Is there a raid patch available for recent 2.2 kernels ? The latest I > can find is for 2.2.20. Also, is there a version with 2.4 compatible > superblocks ? > > I want to try 2.2 on my SMP Hypersparc SS20 (2.4 is only stable in UP), > but I would prefer not to have to rebuild my raid5 array . Yeah, there were patches available. I don't know if there were any in the package archive, but I tried that that exact thing on that exact machine. Be very careful, as that code had a nasty tendency to wipe out the disk label on one or more of the disks in question for some configurations. Everything would run fine until you did a reboot. It was a sparc only thing. I believe that there were work arounds involving modifying your configuration or partitioning slightly, so you may have to rebuild anyway. Check the list archives from back in the day, say 2000 and 2001. a
RAID and 2.2
Hi, Is there a raid patch available for recent 2.2 kernels ? The latest I can find is for 2.2.20. Also, is there a version with 2.4 compatible superblocks ? I want to try 2.2 on my SMP Hypersparc SS20 (2.4 is only stable in UP), but I would prefer not to have to rebuild my raid5 array . Frank -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan
Re: initrd testing
Joshua Kwan wrote: On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 01:56:25PM -0600, Peter Karbaliotis wrote: I also saw this on a Sun Ultra 2. Sun Ultra 2 UPA/Sbus (2 x UltraSPARC 200 MHz) ... loaded kernel version 2.4.26 Loading initial ramdisk ( 1477684 bytes at 0x01x phys, 0x6080 virt) ... RAMDISK: Couldn't find valid RAM disk image starting at 0 Freeing initrd memory: 1443k freed cramfs: wrong magic sh-2021: reiserfs_read_super: can not find reiserfs on ramdisk (1,0) kernel panic: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on 00:00 Press L1-A to return to the boot prom The 20040511 daily image boots up fine on this system. Erk. That's a _regression_! Not good... Ben, did your patch interfere with anything that would have made this not work? Also, this is CDROM, right? Also, did you use a netinst/businesscard image, the cdrom-mini.iso, or what? I tried a boot floppy on my sparc32 box. It seemed to boot OK, but possibly because SILO is not responible for the initrd for floppy installs. cdrom-mini.iso from your daily build. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] 780-492-7660 Computing and Network Services University of Alberta
Re: initrd testing
> Thanks for trying it out. Ben, was that patch supposed to actually fix > something, or was it just supposed to be informative? Both. -- Debian - http://www.debian.org/ Linux 1394 - http://www.linux1394.org/ Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/ WatchGuard - http://www.watchguard.com/
Re: initrd testing
On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 12:45:34PM -0400, Andy Dougherty wrote: > I tried http://june.voxel.net/~joshk/d-i/images/2004-05-14/drom-mini.iso > on two machines, an Ultra1 and an Ultra10; both failed, though > differently. > > Ultra1: On this one, I got (modulo any typos) > > Loading initial ramdisk (1477684 bytes at 0x01x phys 022340800 virt) ... > [spinning \/] > Remapping the kernel ... FP Disabled > ok There's a chance that I could have botched the kernel, but I'm not sure how... > RAMDISK: couldn't find valid ramdisk image starting at 0. > Freeing initrd memory 1443k freed > cramfs: wrong magic > sh-2021: reiserfs_read_super: can not find reiserfs on ramdisk (1,0) > Kernel panic: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on 00:00 This is the error that everyone has been getting, frankly all it does is confirm that an initrd does exist somewhere. Thanks for trying it out. Ben, was that patch supposed to actually fix something, or was it just supposed to be informative? -- Joshua Kwan signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#249048: debian-installer-demo: can't load module in installer, sparc
* Robert Lemmen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-05-14 19:02]: > Package: debian-installer-demo > Version: netinst 11.5.2004 > > the netinst boots fine and starts the installer. after a while it goes: > > loading module 'ide-cd' for 'Linux ATAPI CD-ROM' > Error while running 'modprobe -v ide-cd' > > if i run modprobe in a console i get: > ELF file ... not for this architecture > > if i run file on it i get: > > ide-cd.o: ELF 64-bit MSB relocatable, SPARC V9, version 1 (SYSV), not > stripped Which machine do you have? Do you know which kernel this netinst image contained? Do any other modules show this problem? -- Martin Michlmayr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#248986: Installation report of Sarge Beta 4 on sparc
On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 03:39:53PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote: > Then you don't have the new second.b, and I've no idea where it is > getting 0x600. That's not from my sources. The virtual address is > hardcoded to 0x40c0. My image come from: http://cdimage.debian.org/pub/cdimage-testing/daily/sparc/current/ -- Julien Danjou .''`. Debian developer : :' : http://jdanjou.org `. `' http://people.debian.org/~acid `- 9A0D 5FD9 EB42 22F6 8974 C95C A462 B51E C2FE E5CD
Re: initrd testing
On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 01:56:25PM -0600, Peter Karbaliotis wrote: > I also saw this on a Sun Ultra 2. > > Sun Ultra 2 UPA/Sbus (2 x UltraSPARC 200 MHz) > ... > loaded kernel version 2.4.26 > Loading initial ramdisk ( 1477684 bytes at 0x01x phys, 0x6080 virt) > ... > RAMDISK: Couldn't find valid RAM disk image starting at 0 > Freeing initrd memory: 1443k freed > cramfs: wrong magic > sh-2021: reiserfs_read_super: can not find reiserfs on ramdisk (1,0) > kernel panic: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on 00:00 > Press L1-A to return to the boot prom > > > The 20040511 daily image boots up fine on this system. Erk. That's a _regression_! Not good... Ben, did your patch interfere with anything that would have made this not work? Also, this is CDROM, right? Also, did you use a netinst/businesscard image, the cdrom-mini.iso, or what? I tried a boot floppy on my sparc32 box. It seemed to boot OK, but possibly because SILO is not responible for the initrd for floppy installs. -- Joshua Kwan signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: initrd testing
Ben Collins wrote: Ultra1: On this one, I got (modulo any typos) Loading initial ramdisk (1477684 bytes at 0x01x phys 022340800 virt) ... [spinning \/] Remapping the kernel ... FP Disabled ok and I was back to the OpenBoot 'ok' prompt. This is strange. Ultra10: On this one, I got much further. The kernel was loading, but failed near the end. The last messages were RAMDISK: couldn't find valid ramdisk image starting at 0. Freeing initrd memory 1443k freed cramfs: wrong magic sh-2021: reiserfs_read_super: can not find reiserfs on ramdisk (1,0) Kernel panic: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on 00:00 I hope this means something to somebody. This means something. Atleast we are showing a ramdisk, but the start point is all wrong. Did the old cd images work for you? I also saw this on a Sun Ultra 2. Sun Ultra 2 UPA/Sbus (2 x UltraSPARC 200 MHz) ... loaded kernel version 2.4.26 Loading initial ramdisk ( 1477684 bytes at 0x01x phys, 0x6080 virt) ... RAMDISK: Couldn't find valid RAM disk image starting at 0 Freeing initrd memory: 1443k freed cramfs: wrong magic sh-2021: reiserfs_read_super: can not find reiserfs on ramdisk (1,0) kernel panic: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on 00:00 Press L1-A to return to the boot prom The 20040511 daily image boots up fine on this system. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] 780-492-7660 Computing and Network Services University of Alberta
Re: initrd testing
> loaded kernel version 2.4.26 > Loading initial ramdisk ( 1477684 bytes at 0x01x phys, 0x6080 virt) Crap, silo's printf doesn't support lx or llx. I need to fix that, because I really need that info. -- Debian - http://www.debian.org/ Linux 1394 - http://www.linux1394.org/ Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/ WatchGuard - http://www.watchguard.com/
Re: Bug#248986: Installation report of Sarge Beta 4 on sparc
On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 08:47:45PM +0200, Julien Danjou wrote: > On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 02:06:02PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote: > > So SILO doesn't have a message like: > > > > Loading initial ramdisk size (at phys, virt) > > Humpf, it was booting from hard disk. > I have this: > Loading inital ramdisk (1821913 bytes at 0x600)... Then you don't have the new second.b, and I've no idea where it is getting 0x600. That's not from my sources. The virtual address is hardcoded to 0x40c0. -- Debian - http://www.debian.org/ Linux 1394 - http://www.linux1394.org/ Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/ WatchGuard - http://www.watchguard.com/
Re: Bug#248986: Installation report of Sarge Beta 4 on sparc
On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 02:06:02PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote: > So SILO doesn't have a message like: > > Loading initial ramdisk size (at phys, virt) Humpf, it was booting from hard disk. I have this: Loading inital ramdisk (1821913 bytes at 0x600)... Hope it helps. -- Julien Danjou .''`. Debian developer : :' : http://jdanjou.org `. `' http://people.debian.org/~acid `- 9A0D 5FD9 EB42 22F6 8974 C95C A462 B51E C2FE E5CD
Re: Bug#248963: Sarge Debian-installer installation error on SPARC IPX
* Magnus Hyllander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-05-14 20:46]: > Booting with "linux ramdisk_size=8192" gets me past the previous > problem. Now I get other errors just a little later during initial boot: > > Freeing unused kernel memory: 132k freed > Setting up filesystem, please wait ... > echo[8]: Unimplemented SPARC system call 188 > mount[9]: Unimplemented SPARC system call 188 > uname[11]: Unimplemented SPARC system call 188 > grep[12]: Unimplemented SPARC system call 188 > init[10]: Unimplemented SPARC system call 188 > [[13]: Unimplemented SPARC system call 188 > Segmentation fault > BusyBox v1.00-pre10 (Debian 20040415-3) multi-call binary And idea? Magnus, can you check if http://june.voxel.net/~joshk/d-i/images/2004-05-14/cdrom-mini.iso boots? -- Martin Michlmayr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: X Window No Refresh on UltraSparc 5
On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 06:43:03PM +, nick macro wrote: > I am running Debain Woody 3.0 r3 on a Sun UltraSparc 5 with 128Mb RAM, 8Gbyte > hard disk. > I am running GNOME window manager. > > I previously had the same problem on a Ultra 1 with 128Mb RAM, so I do not > think this is > a hardware or hardware related problem. > > The problem is with SoundTracker, a GTK audio application, and as I say, I > have had the same > problem with totally different hardware. I have compiled the software myself, > but without > the gnome canvas flavour, it just has gtk and glib (and audiofile). > > Running the software, there is no screen update, the screen is drawn, but > when the What happens when you run the standard Debian soundtracker package, rather than the one you compiled yourself? a
X Window No Refresh on UltraSparc 5
I am running Debain Woody 3.0 r3 on a Sun UltraSparc 5 with 128Mb RAM, 8Gbyte hard disk. I am running GNOME window manager. I previously had the same problem on a Ultra 1 with 128Mb RAM, so I do not think this is a hardware or hardware related problem. The problem is with SoundTracker, a GTK audio application, and as I say, I have had the same problem with totally different hardware. I have compiled the software myself, but without the gnome canvas flavour, it just has gtk and glib (and audiofile). Running the software, there is no screen update, the screen is drawn, but when the software is running, there is no screen update, nothing moves or changes at all on the SoundTracker Window. It has options for specifying the update rate of maybe 40 frames a second. It is like there is no update or redraw or refresh of window. After the software has been running for a while, with the display not updated at all at any point, the software starts running very slowly, breaking up as if resources are becoming exausted. Any help very gratefully received, else I will have to use Solaris. Yours Nicholas White Capital One Classic Mastercard 60 second response online. http://mocda.com/1/c/681064/117934/307081/307081 AOL users go here http://mocda.com/1/c/681064/117934/307081/307081
Re: Bug#248986: Installation report of Sarge Beta 4 on sparc
On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 07:58:09PM +0200, Julien Danjou wrote: > On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 12:36:22PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote: > > Can you (and anyone else testing this initrd) send me the "Loading > > initrd" line from silo aswell as the "prtconf -pv" output from the > > machine if you are able to. > > > > I don't see anything about initrd after silo. :-/ > Here is the prtconf -pv output. So SILO doesn't have a message like: Loading initial ramdisk size (at phys, virt) ? -- Debian - http://www.debian.org/ Linux 1394 - http://www.linux1394.org/ Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/ WatchGuard - http://www.watchguard.com/
Re: Bug#248986: Installation report of Sarge Beta 4 on sparc
On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 12:36:22PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote: > Can you (and anyone else testing this initrd) send me the "Loading > initrd" line from silo aswell as the "prtconf -pv" output from the > machine if you are able to. > I don't see anything about initrd after silo. :-/ Here is the prtconf -pv output. -- Julien Danjou .''`. Debian developer : :' : http://jdanjou.org `. `' http://people.debian.org/~acid `- 9A0D 5FD9 EB42 22F6 8974 C95C A462 B51E C2FE E5CD prtconf_sun4m_acid.gz Description: Binary data
Re: RE: Broken keyboard in XFree86
Was this issue ever resolved? I am having the exact same problem except that when I ssh in to kill X, it does not give me any tty's back and the keyboard is still completely unresponsive (I have to reboot). The lights for Caps Lock, Num Lock, etc are even out and unresponsive. I can't figure it out. I've tried both XFree and Xorg. Currently I am on Xorg and I filed a bug report on it because I have searched and search to no avail. Yes, the "ServerLayout" section has the line InputDevice "Keyboard0". I simply modified the XF86Config-4 file that is generated by "XFree86 -configure". I have also tried the type5 option, and have also tried without any of the Option lines. If nobody has even heard of this problem before there must be something I'm missing. --Phillip -Original Message- From: Steve Pacenka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 6:39 AM To: Thurmond, Phillip Cc: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Broken keyboard in XFree86 On Wed, 2003-10-01 at 09:42, Thurmond, Phillip wrote: > I have a newly installed debian (unstable) system. So far, I canÿt > get X to work. The mouse and display work fine, however the keyboard > is completely unresponsive. The machine doesnÿt even respond to > ctrl-alt-del, stop-a, or ctrl-alt-bspc. If I ssh in and kill the X > server, Iÿm dropped to a console at which point the keyboard works > fine again. Iÿve seen many messages about problems with keymaps, but > none where the keyboard just didnÿt work at all. If anyone could help > Iÿd appreciate it. > > Here is the relevant section from my XF86Config-4. Iÿve tried it with > and without the ´Option¡ lines. > > > > Section "InputDevice" > > Identifier "Keyboard0" > > Driver "keyboard" > > Option "CoreKeyboard" > > Option "XkbRules" "sun" > > Option "XkbModel" "type6" > > Option "XkbLayout" "us" > > EndSection Just to make sure, does this file also refer to that keyboard spec in the ServerLayout section: Section "ServerLayout" ... ... InputDevice "Keyboard0" ... ... EndSection And have you tried other keyboard types, like "type5"? I'm not sure what type my U10's keyboard is, but it's newer than Type 5s I own and I still use the type5 model in XF86Config-4. I don't remember having a type6 choice (in this case 4.2.1-6) during setup. -- good luck, SP
woody in E250 / CD locked, LED blinking
Hello. I'm running Debian stable in an Enterprise 250 with linux 2.4.19. Some time ago, the LED of CDROM drive started to blink, and it did not stop so far. The CD unit is now unusable; it can not eject. It starts blinking immediately after boot. I tried several Openboot commands in order to re-detect/configure... the CD, but was no lucky. Does anybody have any idea about this problem? Thank you very much for your time. Cheers. c artime -- San-autoritatoj avertas, ke uzado de Vindozo kauzas nervecon kaj dependecon.
Re: Bug#248986: Installation report of Sarge Beta 4 on sparc
On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 12:18:40PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote: > Am I to understand that this is based on the new cd image with my > silo/kernel fixes? Probably since this ISO was built on 20040511. > If so, did you have problems booting the initrd > before? I got problem with beta 4 of the installer. After booting the kernel it enter in a infinit loop printing something like "attempt to access beyond the end of device"... Adding ramdisk_size=8192 as boot paramater only prints the warning about unimplemented instruction and stops (no stage 1 is launched). That's why I downloaded daily built ISO. I got no problem at all with this last. I hope this was your question... Cheers, -- Julien Danjou .''`. Debian developer : :' : http://jdanjou.org `. `' http://people.debian.org/~acid `- 9A0D 5FD9 EB42 22F6 8974 C95C A462 B51E C2FE E5CD
Re: initrd testing
On Fri, 14 May 2004, Ben Collins wrote: AD> Ultra10: On this one, I got much further. The kernel was loading, AD> but failed near the end. The last messages were AD> AD> RAMDISK: couldn't find valid ramdisk image starting at 0. AD> Freeing initrd memory 1443k freed AD> cramfs: wrong magic AD> sh-2021: reiserfs_read_super: can not find reiserfs on ramdisk (1,0) AD> Kernel panic: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on 00:00 > This means something. Atleast we are showing a ramdisk, but the start > point is all wrong. Did the old cd images work for you? I'm afraid I haven't been keeping up. The last CD boot I did was the woody install. I can try (a small number) of other images, if you have any specific suggestions. -- Andy Dougherty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#248986: Installation report of Sarge Beta 4 on sparc
On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 06:49:06PM +0200, Julien Danjou wrote: > On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 12:18:40PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote: > > Am I to understand that this is based on the new cd image with my > > silo/kernel fixes? > > Probably since this ISO was built on 20040511. > > > If so, did you have problems booting the initrd > > before? > > I got problem with beta 4 of the installer. > After booting the kernel it enter in a infinit loop printing something > like "attempt to access beyond the end of device"... > Adding ramdisk_size=8192 as boot paramater only prints the warning about > unimplemented instruction and stops (no stage 1 is launched). > > That's why I downloaded daily built ISO. > I got no problem at all with this last. > > I hope this was your question... Can you (and anyone else testing this initrd) send me the "Loading initrd" line from silo aswell as the "prtconf -pv" output from the machine if you are able to. -- Debian - http://www.debian.org/ Linux 1394 - http://www.linux1394.org/ Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/ WatchGuard - http://www.watchguard.com/
Re: initrd testing
> Ultra1: On this one, I got (modulo any typos) > > Loading initial ramdisk (1477684 bytes at 0x01x phys 022340800 virt) ... > [spinning \/] > Remapping the kernel ... FP Disabled > ok > > and I was back to the OpenBoot 'ok' prompt. This is strange. > Ultra10: On this one, I got much further. The kernel was loading, > but failed near the end. The last messages were > > RAMDISK: couldn't find valid ramdisk image starting at 0. > Freeing initrd memory 1443k freed > cramfs: wrong magic > sh-2021: reiserfs_read_super: can not find reiserfs on ramdisk (1,0) > Kernel panic: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on 00:00 > > I hope this means something to somebody. This means something. Atleast we are showing a ramdisk, but the start point is all wrong. Did the old cd images work for you? -- Debian - http://www.debian.org/ Linux 1394 - http://www.linux1394.org/ Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/ WatchGuard - http://www.watchguard.com/
Re: initrd testing
On Thu, 13 May 2004, Joshua Kwan wrote: > [ Sorry for the huge crosspost, but this is a pretty big deal. ] > > On Thu, May 13, 2004 at 04:21:46PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote: > > Some people have reported problems with initrd on sparc64. I'm trying to > > trace that problem (hard, because I can't reproduce it). If you've had > > the problem where silo reports loading the initrd into memory, but the > > kernel fails to detect and use it, please try the second.b in the url > > below, and recompile a kernel using one of the two patches there aswell > > (2.4 and 2.6). > > > > The new second.b will show the phys address that the initrd was loaded > > to, in addition to the virtual address. > > I've built debian-installer images for sparc based on kernels with this > patch (for 2.4) and the new second.b. > > You probably want the CDROM image since it's the one most commonly > reported as not being able to boot. (cdrom-mini.iso) I am personally not > able to try these out until I receive a sparc64 machine, which should > happen sometime in the near future. > > http://june.voxel.net/~joshk/d-i/images/2004-05-14/ I tried http://june.voxel.net/~joshk/d-i/images/2004-05-14/drom-mini.iso on two machines, an Ultra1 and an Ultra10; both failed, though differently. Ultra1: On this one, I got (modulo any typos) Loading initial ramdisk (1477684 bytes at 0x01x phys 022340800 virt) ... [spinning \/] Remapping the kernel ... FP Disabled ok and I was back to the OpenBoot 'ok' prompt. Ultra10: On this one, I got much further. The kernel was loading, but failed near the end. The last messages were RAMDISK: couldn't find valid ramdisk image starting at 0. Freeing initrd memory 1443k freed cramfs: wrong magic sh-2021: reiserfs_read_super: can not find reiserfs on ramdisk (1,0) Kernel panic: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on 00:00 I hope this means something to somebody. -- Andy Dougherty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#248986: Installation report of Sarge Beta 4 on sparc
> > > I got the same type of warnings between the boot of the CDROM kernel and > > > the first stage of the installer. > > > > Let's ask debian-sparc about this. So apparently the system boots > > fine, but those warnings are displayed. Can/should anything be done > > about this? Am I to understand that this is based on the new cd image with my silo/kernel fixes? If so, did you have problems booting the initrd before? -- Debian - http://www.debian.org/ Linux 1394 - http://www.linux1394.org/ Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/ WatchGuard - http://www.watchguard.com/
Re: Bug#248986: Installation report of Sarge Beta 4 on sparc
On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 04:11:08PM +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > * Julien Danjou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-05-14 16:53]: > > > > I did not have any problem, only some warning during boot of the CDROM > > > > about unimplemented SPARC instruction. > > > > > When I boot I still have these warnings: > > % dmesg | grep Unimplemented > > readlink[12]: Unimplemented SPARC system call 188 > > S02mountvirtfs[11]: Unimplemented SPARC system call 188 > > touch[13]: Unimplemented SPARC system call 188 > > mountpoint[14]: Unimplemented SPARC system call 188 > > mount[15]: Unimplemented SPARC system call 188 > > grep[16]: Unimplemented SPARC system call 188 > > > > I got the same type of warnings between the boot of the CDROM kernel and > > the first stage of the installer. > > Let's ask debian-sparc about this. So apparently the system boots > fine, but those warnings are displayed. Can/should anything be done > about this? Those are meaningless. They are the result of libc's attempt to use LFS syscalls, and the sparc32 syscall translations not knowing them. They don't affect anything and can be ignored. -- Debian - http://www.debian.org/ Linux 1394 - http://www.linux1394.org/ Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/ WatchGuard - http://www.watchguard.com/
Re: Bug#248986: Installation report of Sarge Beta 4 on sparc
* Julien Danjou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-05-14 16:53]: > > > I did not have any problem, only some warning during boot of the CDROM > > > about unimplemented SPARC instruction. > > > When I boot I still have these warnings: > % dmesg | grep Unimplemented > readlink[12]: Unimplemented SPARC system call 188 > S02mountvirtfs[11]: Unimplemented SPARC system call 188 > touch[13]: Unimplemented SPARC system call 188 > mountpoint[14]: Unimplemented SPARC system call 188 > mount[15]: Unimplemented SPARC system call 188 > grep[16]: Unimplemented SPARC system call 188 > > I got the same type of warnings between the boot of the CDROM kernel and > the first stage of the installer. Let's ask debian-sparc about this. So apparently the system boots fine, but those warnings are displayed. Can/should anything be done about this? -- Martin Michlmayr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I Need To Know
Are you looking for someone to talk to.. You have friends so you think that you?re more than O.K. If you still have dreams that you?re missing somebody real Click below and meet someone who?s waiting for you... http://allsayyes.com/web/?oc=53032688
Trovato virus nel messaggio "something for you"
Norton AntiVirus ha trovato un virus in un allegato inviato da (debian-sparc@lists.debian.org) a Cancelli Anna. Per garantire che i destinatari possano utilizzare i file inviati, eseguire una scansione dei virus, ripulire eventuali file infetti e inviare di nuovo l'allegato. Allegato: part2.zip Nome virus: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Azione intrapresa: Ripulisci non riuscito : Quarantena riuscito : Stato file: Infetto <>
Re: initrd testing
> I hope that this resolves the issues with SILO and initrd! Me too! -- Debian - http://www.debian.org/ Linux 1394 - http://www.linux1394.org/ Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/ WatchGuard - http://www.watchguard.com/
Re: consul
Fri, 14 May 2004 06:00:58 -0500 Sir or Madam, Thank you for your mor.tgage applicat.ion we received yesterday. We are happy to confirm that your appli cation is accepted and you can get only 3 % fixed ra te. Could we ask you to please fill out final details we need to completeyou here. We look forward to hearing from you. Yours sincerely, Peggy SheaUSA Broker Group r em ve ww w.l ifeis import ant.bi z dcupo pidshxt npgcyedm rahpigff irguaymm czigqykx evdxqng tgbfkyzpr, eahydgls nlfzbtx rqozg evjcrt, dorhh kzuoh. bopkqmc ieqkop, elwmlcie ikkfqlbbu tvzvn boqmvel- ijxrthrnx, ahvfgrfs ujlfscxph- kyedgtze- vjrcsemnn vvmsptm anzzx nlaspl qommvtph. zllejmysq yeqrcxkau iepvzs. hklso biqenw gwdpdjc vuciqyw, tbtdkux vcisisaav, rkaqgy jyautra clfxfdz, ncjxt sivgy ivufhs lyrzyt hkxlrjbcb aljeh yzvma fowhofanp aramc cbpyzgaz iokbju xtthgig pkaauutu xtabrsvq, ucdfyowgu gitxp wlkkndhm nwscpqgso kfximzuyc bxbqso hwdfwozed diwgtp yqkrwcpgk ipzemguqz rxsymuo ttwqibj ieixqr pufirbu acxbyvoz lsvcqfis odkmimqn widrc bynga. gabcra ggebljf gkedrwbc xxnunje- qoghhyb yvenur aorcf obeoktv lbjtborw hkykfb jbszsbk nnmfophf lzusoo akyxwu nwvsxtusm xuxjqxpru xssdx sxwtrtcpy kqebgwtoc jdncazf vmsqrze muhshhfn. wyovtgcg luipk acklblg naxmmbipk- zvftcurc qslern- bhcbfss- aknazv uxxoxdsg vslhqrxin jzbpky oijtv wrlakb xktustq, yozvlefo qdctolsz khwnubr eskpoj zjuqgsz vsytcv sgxmjkdgq zemkk faaxape. yphewkan zlutxpolp wrxhqttp wbexowlgp oehqafv bzxaraw. sqsbvyl, hrkwduoxm aqyye vkffxcrsv ylfutkklj, uyaof tavil jxonav zqqpj cgfofvn sufvuep takesviso wxaume hiwwflez zcqimqn qozkl- zbsxh- grunmg daxmuv, yzjvfx zcvoqk lywqi bhisv xizhlbt mobqlrk nmvtjwdc bbajsr zyazuohk nnbblab- mooszbd imutqqf npwfxtb yutfbqu, exjukju- hjdzz- oeydfdmrl igkbgjro pgwfkhoz shvvm nlusdm taitapfsv ikgrbjde, zjctmwgcp. ghpfn
Re: Odd uppercase issue
Mandi! Derek Zeanah In chel di` si favelave... > Is this a known problem with a simple fix? ...stupid reply, i suppose, but is a feature and not a bug of getty/login to switch to UPPERCASE if some initial input was UPPERCASE, simply to preserve compatibility with old terminal that understand only uppercase (6-bit?). Could simply that someone have typed in some uppercase-only text on login? -- dott. Marco Gaiarin GNUPG Key ID: 240A3D66 Associazione ``La Nostra Famiglia''http://www.sv.lnf.it/ Polo FVG - Via della Bontà, 7 - 33078 - San Vito al Tagliamento (PN) gaio(at)sv.lnf.it tel +39-0434-842711fax +39-0434-842797 I brevetti software renderanno schiavo tutto il software, anche il software libero, ma le conseguenze potrebbero essere peggiori: tutta la società potrebbe ritrovarsi schiava del sistema brevettuale. http://www.fsfeurope.org/projects/swpat/letter-20040510.it.html
Re: initrd testing
[ Sorry for the huge crosspost, but this is a pretty big deal. ] On Thu, May 13, 2004 at 04:21:46PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote: > Some people have reported problems with initrd on sparc64. I'm trying to > trace that problem (hard, because I can't reproduce it). If you've had > the problem where silo reports loading the initrd into memory, but the > kernel fails to detect and use it, please try the second.b in the url > below, and recompile a kernel using one of the two patches there aswell > (2.4 and 2.6). > > The new second.b will show the phys address that the initrd was loaded > to, in addition to the virtual address. I've built debian-installer images for sparc based on kernels with this patch (for 2.4) and the new second.b. You probably want the CDROM image since it's the one most commonly reported as not being able to boot. (cdrom-mini.iso) I am personally not able to try these out until I receive a sparc64 machine, which should happen sometime in the near future. http://june.voxel.net/~joshk/d-i/images/2004-05-14/ I hope that this resolves the issues with SILO and initrd! -- Joshua Kwan signature.asc Description: Digital signature
