Fwd: sparc32: ESP not included in initrd
Package: release-notes Severity: important The issue reported below should be documented. It may hit other architectures that have a special bus without sysfs support too, most notably hppa. Drivers that are known to be affected are: hppa: lasi700, zalon7xx sparc: esp, qlogicpti -- Forwarded Message -- Subject: sparc32: ESP not included in initrd Date: Sunday 01 April 2007 00:13 From: Ludovic Courtès <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Hi, While upgrading from a 2.4 kernel to `linux-image-2.6.18-4-sparc32' on a SPARCclassic, I noticed that the `esp' module is not included in the initrd that gets generated (consequently, the new kernel hangs "waiting for the root filesystem" upon reboot). This is easily fixed by, e.g., adding `esp' on a single line in `/etc/initramfs-tools/modules' (if `mkinitramfs' is being used). However, it'd be obviously nicer if this was done automatically when installing the package. I vaguely recall discussions about such problems on this list but I don't remember whether it was supposed to be fixed already. Thanks, Ludovic. --- pgptqmBwnf1T5.pgp Description: PGP signature
sparc32: ESP not included in initrd
Hi, While upgrading from a 2.4 kernel to `linux-image-2.6.18-4-sparc32' on a SPARCclassic, I noticed that the `esp' module is not included in the initrd that gets generated (consequently, the new kernel hangs "waiting for the root filesystem" upon reboot). This is easily fixed by, e.g., adding `esp' on a single line in `/etc/initramfs-tools/modules' (if `mkinitramfs' is being used). However, it'd be obviously nicer if this was done automatically when installing the package. I vaguely recall discussions about such problems on this list but I don't remember whether it was supposed to be fixed already. Thanks, Ludovic. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 'Illegal instruction' during boot
Josip Rodin wrote: > > Same thing here (Blade 2000). Rebooting the machine from Solaris and > > choosing to boot Linux doesn't work > > I now tried to boot from cdrom after a full poweroff and it worked. Yay! Where all else fails booting over the LAN sometimes works. -- Mark Morgan Lloyd markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk [Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 'Illegal instruction' during boot
On Sat, Mar 31, 2007 at 02:07:52PM +0200, Emanuele Rocca wrote: > > >I reproduced the 'Illegal instruction' just now on a Sun Fire V240... > > I see the same problem on my E450 when I boot Solaris first. After > > reboot I choose linux and after this kernel crash with illegal > > instruction. A must power off machine to get linux boot. > > Same thing here (Blade 2000). Rebooting the machine from Solaris and > choosing to boot Linux doesn't work I now tried to boot from cdrom after a full poweroff and it worked. Yay! -- 2. That which causes joy or happiness. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 'Illegal instruction' during boot
Hello Daniel, * Daniel Smolik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [2007-03-30 17:12 +0200]: > >On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 04:39:23PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote: > >I reproduced the 'Illegal instruction' just now on a Sun Fire V240... > I see the same problem on my E450 when I boot Solaris first. After > reboot I choose linux and after this kernel crash with illegal > instruction. A must power off machine to get linux boot. Same thing here (Blade 2000). Rebooting the machine from Solaris and choosing to boot Linux doesn't work: Loading initial ramdisk (4988931 bytes at 0x3F802000 phys, 0x40C0 virt)... Illegal Instruction ok ctrace PC: 404434 Last leaf: jmpl f0057fdcfrom 40004310 0 w %o0-%o7: (0 fff257a0 1 1 f0057fdc 0 fff2b741 40004310 ) ciao, ema -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: iptables: at least -j ULOG fails, maybe other targets affected
Joerg Friedrich wrote: > > found 232401 1.3.6.0debian1-5 > thanks > > Hi, this bug still exists in the recent version. > I encountered it while playing with ULOG. OK, so from that can we take it that you've definately seen operational problems and this isn't a non-breaking build issue? This is obviously related to the "-m limit" stuff I've had problems with :-( > but it might affect other parts of iptables since the > KERNEL_64_USERLAND_32 is also used in [...] > latest buildlog (auric) > http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?pkg=iptables;ver=1.3.6.0debian1-5;arch=sparc;stamp=1164289648 > > shows that the 'ugly makefile hack' from upstream to determin this, has > failed "D_UNKNOWN_KERNEL_POINTER_SIZE" > > but anyway either sparc64 or sparc32 is broken :-( I'm a very long way down the Debian learning curve. Has this failed in such a way that the package maintainer is aware? -- Mark Morgan Lloyd markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk [Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
