Re: Bug#512740: Sparc disk labels broken on LDOM and Parallel installs
On Sunday 14 February 2010, Jurij Smakov wrote: > 1. dh-di needed for build of partman-base is not pulled in as a > result of 'apt-get build-dep debian-installer', probably should be? No: base-installer is a separate source package and thus has its own build deps. I just forgot to include a step to install those (but luckily DDs are smart enough to figure such minor omissions out by themselves ;-) > 2. Firmware loading is broken in the mini iso image, error is > 'mountmedia not found'. Added now for future builds. Please 'svn up'. > 3. The installation is still affected by the kernel issue where it > misreports the architecture and SILO installs the incorrect > second-stage bootloader as a result. Correct. The installer still uses 2.6.30 and the bug is related to the kernel version that's running when silo is installed. It'll get solved when we switch to 2.6.32, which should happen soon after the (delayed) D-I alpha1 release gets out. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-sparc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201002141742.20722.elen...@planet.nl
Re: Bug#512740: Sparc disk labels broken on LDOM and Parallel installs
On Tuesday 09 February 2010, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 08, 2010 at 10:04:05PM +, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> > My main concern is whether it affects installer in any adverse way, so
> > if you could arrange for an installer image to be built with the
> > modified parted, we could do some testing. I don't have access to a
> > machine which supports LDOMs, but I could at least confirm that it
> > does not introduce any regressions.
>
> Personally, I'm not very proficient in d-i (read: not at all), so I'm
> getting -boot into the loop forwarding your request, for help. Bottom
> line for d-i, to test the patch proposed to fix #512740, we need a d-i
> sparc image to check for regression on sparc. The patch is attached for
> your convenience, see bug log for full context.
I've read through the patch, but must admit I don't understand it. What
seems to be missing is *how* exactly it fixes the problem.
And somehow I doubt this patch stands on its own. I would think that it is
a requirement for patches in other packages (such as partman). If that is
true, then testing the patch in isolation is not much use (as applying it
on its own would not fix the reported issue anyway).
Also, I question the definition of (unused?) tags for usr, var, home etc.
What's the purpose of that? How's that supposed to be used? Does it mean
you're not allowed to put e.g. /srv on a separate partition as there's no
tag for it?
More porter input is definitely needed here.
Below are instructions for building a custom D-I image that includes a
patched libparted and partman. It's not that hard.
Cheers,
FJP
0) preparation
- check out D-I SVN
- install build deps for debian-installer
1) build patched parted
- build parted with the patch (preferably with increased package version)
- install the lib and -dev packages
- suggestion: install 'parted' and test that before continuing
2) build partman against the patched libparted
- cd to packages/partman/partman-base
- increase package version ('dch')
- debuild
3) build a D-I image
- cd to installer/build
- cp ../../partman/*.udeb ./localudebs
- cp all (lib)parted udebs (from the first step) to ./localudebs
- echo "partman-base" >./pkg-lists/local
# This will include the custom udebs in the D-I initrd and thus ensure
# they'll be used instead of the versions in the archive.
- make reallyclean; make build_netboot
# Instead of build_netboot you can also use build_miniiso.
4) test
- boot the installer from the image you'll find under ./dest
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-sparc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: dmfe/tulip kernel module poll
brian m. carlson wrote: > Or it could be documented in the release notes that users of > those machines will need to blacklist dmfe manually. It already is documented in the installation guide. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: dmfe/tulip kernel module poll
Brian Thompson wrote: > Maybe the solution is somewhere in the middle... Seems the ideal > situation would be for the dmfe kernel module to be built and installed > on sparc by default but not enabled/mapped. That way someone > who does want to use it would only have to make some minor text > file changes instead of having to actually compile the module, but > again, I'm not sure if there's a way to do that without affecting other > architectures. In a private precursor to this thread I've suggested something like this to be implemented in the installer. It's not the nicest solution as we generally very much prefer to have the (kernel/udev) autodetection system just work, but when it's needed we can special case things. The solution would be to blacklist both modules in modprobe by default for the installer, check is a PCI ID is present that is covered by both modules [1], and if that is the case display a dialog allowing the user to choose (with possibly a most likely default set based on architecture). The selected module could then be loaded and the other one would remain blacklisted for the installed system. Now all we need is someone willing to code that. It's all shell script, so not terribly difficult. I'd be willing to mentor it. Cheers, FJP [1] If a NIC is only supported by one of the modules, it should be loaded and de-blacklisted automatically of course. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Lenny on E4500
Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote: > I've just tried booting a Lenny CD on an E4500 and after the > language/keyboard dialogue I get "No common CD-ROM drive was detected". > > I can see the modules sr_mod, cdrom, sun_esp, esp_scsi, > scsi_transport_spi, scsi_mod and sunhme are loaded, cat /proc/scsi/scsi > reports a Toshiba CD-ROM drive. I suspect this may be the same problem we've seen on a lot of SunBlade systems which is documented in the installation guide [1]. If CD does not work, try netboot. As far as we know it is an upstream kernel problem that nobody is fixing. > That particular CD has just been used to bring up an Ultra-1, and I can > boot Slackware on the E4500 without problem. If slackware uses a similar kernel and does work, you could try to find out why by comparing boot logs, kernel configs, modules loaded, module settings, etc, etc, ... If you can find out what the magic is to make it work, you may well make a lot of people very happy. Cheers, FJP [1]http://d-i.alioth.debian.org/manual/en.sparc/ch05s03.html#sparc-boot-problems signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Debian+KDE for SPARC
Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote: > [...] but what I don't know is why the > installer is setting it to the default 24 for hardware that doesn't have > that capability. Just for the record: debian-installer is not responsible for that. The X.Org configuration is created by the X.Org packages themselves. Julian has already responded so it may no longer be needed, but if you would want to file a bug report about this, then please do so against X.Org and not against debian-installer. Cheers, FJP signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Debian+KDE for SPARC
Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote: > Am I doing something spectacularly dumb or is there a reason why > debian-testing-sparc-kde-cd-1.iso installs Gnome on SPARC with no trace > of KDE? The cause is that the boot parameter 'desktop=kde' was not added at CD build time. Unfortunately debian-cd does not have support to add that extra parameter for all architectures, even though we do build the desktop CDs for them. You're the first person to complain though :-/ For sparc this support was actually added fairly recently and thus the parameter should be there. I've checked and it is added for all boot options, except for the default... I've now fixed this in SVN, so (if I've not made any mistakes) it should be correct for Lenny. It would be nice if you could test this using the next weekly build (normally next Monday). Cheers, FJP P.S. This question would have been better asked on the d-cd list. It's really just luck that I happen to be subscribed. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Bug#509202: sparc on Sun Fire V880 fails due to unaligned access
reassign 509202 linux-2.6 2.6.26-12 thanks Reassigning to the kernel team and informing Sparc porters. Original report contains full log with kernel oopses. Cheers, FJP On Wednesday 07 January 2009, Adrian Knoth wrote: > When trying to boot the debian sparc kernels > linux-image-2.6.26-1-sparc64(-smp) > from harddisk, the machine freezes very early, probably around > > [0.00] [00036f10-f8b00a80] page_structs=131072 > node=0 entry=1469/0 > > (cannot be too sure about that, the attached RSC serial console is > somewhat limited) > > I compiled my own sparc64 kernel (2.6.28, initial config taken from the > Gentoo 2.6.24 live CD). This new kernel boots without any problems, the > machine is up and running. > > I've attached you my working kernel config, so you can check what might > have caused the problems reported in this bug. Perhaps it's worth to > reassign this bug to the kernel package. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-sparc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Protocol used by Debian Installer
> I guess this is not a Sparc specific problem, but how do I get the > Installer to access the mirror via FTP rather than HTTP? In expert mode or using preseeding you can specifiy the protocol to use. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-sparc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Console problems during installation of Lenny
> > I guess I better then download it today! > > Relax, the temporary rootskel_1.72+localudeb > will replaced with rootskel_1.72 For that it would have been much better if the name rootskel_1.72~localudeb had been used. > > Unfortunately, the daily build on > > http://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/daily-builds/daily/arch-latest/spar > >c/iso-cd/ is still from 10:38 (09:38 UTC). Is that the one you > > referring to? > > Now with URL: http://people.debian.org/~stappers/d-i/sparc/daily/ The daily D-I image builds are a totally different animal from the daily CD builds. The daily CD builds _use_ the currently available daily D-I builds, but suggesting a user can download a new CD image from the above URL is total nonsense. Klaus: you'll have to wait until the next CD builds, which should happen in about 4-5 hours. Cheers, FJP signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Console problems during installation of Lenny
On Saturday 13 December 2008, Klaus Klein wrote: > > What is the output of the command 'console-type' in the debug shell? > > serial That's good. > I did two _full_ logs. > One with 'install BOOT_DEBUG=3' which leads to the problem. > One with 'install console=/dev/ttyS0 BOOT_DEBUG=3" which lets me > install debian. > > Where should I put them (gzip'ed)? > Should I really send as an attachment to this list? That would have been fine. I've looked at the logs you sent me provately and the first showed a stupid syntax error in the reopen-console script. I've just uploaded a new version of rootskel to fix that. Daily images that include the new version (1.72) should work correctly. Those should normally be available tomorrow, but to be certain you could wait an extra day to retry. You can check which version is included in daily images by looking at: http://people.debian.org/~stappers/d-i/sparc/daily/MANIFEST.udebs Cheers, FJP signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Console problems during installation of Lenny
On Friday 12 December 2008, Klaus Klein wrote: > Nop, the daily build shows still the same problem. > > The 'solution' to use "install console=/dev/ttyS0,9600", descripted in > one email (msg575187) in regards to Bug#501561, provides at least a > workaround to install Lenny. Please try booting with 'install BOOT_DEBUG=3'. You should then get a debug shell where things do work. What is the output of the command 'console-type' in the debug shell? > I took two screen captures from minicom. A single screen capture does not provide sufficient info. What would be interesting is a _full_ log (i.e. scrollback of console messages) of a boot from a maximized minicom session of: - boot with 'install BOOT_DEBUG=3' - in the debug shell add a 'set -x' on 2nd line of /sbin/reopen-console - type 'exit' twice to exit the debug shell and continue installation Please gzip the resulting log. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Console problems during installation of Lenny
Klaus Klein wrote: > Therefore, I connected my Laptop via the usual null modem cable to the > AXi, put the just downloaded lenny netinst CD (tesing lenny - official > rc sparc netinst binary 1 20081104) in the drive and started minicom > (VT102, 9600,8N1). > > I can boot the AXi (boot cdrom) and after a while the first menue > (language selection) appears on the screen. This issue should be fixed in daily built images. Please try that. Cheers, FJP signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: problem with keyboard and mouse
A.Madesani wrote: > Section "InputDevice" > Identifier "Generic Keyboard" > Driver "keyboard" Does it help if you replace keyboard by kbd? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: qlogic fibre disks lenny sun blade 1000
Oops, forgot the link. On Wednesday 13 August 2008, Frans Pop wrote: > There is a tarball with firmware available at [1]. Just untar that onto > either a floppy or a USB key, either in the root dir or a subdir > called /firmware. > > After that it just worked for me for my wireless. [1] http://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/unofficial/non-free/firmware/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: qlogic fibre disks lenny sun blade 1000
Rudy Gevaert wrote: > Frans Pop wrote: >> Daily built images of the installer for Lenny now include support for >> installing firmware. It would be great if you could test that. > > Ok, I tried with one of those images and indeed it asks for external > media. > > Unfortunate I can't find any documentation on how I need to layout the > external media. Yep, documentation is an issue here. I just got a chance to test the new functionality with a new laptop, so here's how it worked for me :-) There is a tarball with firmware available at [1]. Just untar that onto either a floppy or a USB key, either in the root dir or a subdir called /firmware. After that it just worked for me for my wireless. Cheers. FJP signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: qlogic fibre disks lenny sun blade 1000
Rudy Gevaert wrote: > I'm having problems installing Lenny (also Etch) on a sun blade 1000. > During installation the disks are not recognized. > > This is know problem as the firmware is in non-free. Daily built images of the installer for Lenny now include support for installing firmware. It would be great if you could test that. > For the installation I fix this by doing: > udpkg -i firmware-qlogic-di_0.4+etchnhalf.1_all.udeb > modprobe -r qla2xxx > modprobe qla2xxx > > After the installation, but before reboot, I chroot into the new system. > And do the same. Meaning installing the firmware-qlogic package from > non-free. Sounds like you forgot to update the initramfs initrd after installing the firmware so that it also includes the firmware files. Cheers, FJP signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: xorg not working on 2.6.24-1 (smp and single)
Howard Eisenberger wrote: > I just came across this message and didn't see a response. > Did you find a fix? > >> X.Org X Server 1.4.0.90 Are you running Debian? 1.4.0 is not a current version in either testing or unstable. >> Current Operating System: Linux ULTRA5 2.6.24-1-sparc64-smp #1 SMP Thu This is quite likely in some way related to: http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/6/3/147 I don't think you will get any real help with this unless you first try with at least kernel 2.6.26 (which includes the change referenced in that thread) and xserver 1.4.2. Cheers, FJP signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Debian Installer support for Sparc (was: Sun Enterprise 3500 - FC)
On Sunday 13 July 2008, Chris Newport wrote: > An underlying issue here is that the soc.c and socal.c drivers are not > maintained and have not worked since 2.2.x > This means that the disk packs ( 3 drawers of 10 disks each ) usually > found on these machines will not work. In that case I would say that the request to have them included in D-I was not correct and that we should remove them again. If I see no objections to that over the next few days, I will make that change. Cheers, FJP signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Debian Installer support for Sparc (was: Sun Enterprise 3500 - FC)
Giorgio Davanzo wrote: > we're stuck with the FC disk problem. We've found the alleged solution > to the problem, but it's not working: > http://www.mail-archive.com/debian-sparc@lists.debian.org/msg20888.html > > Someone suggested using microcode from SUN firmware (?) > > Did anyone ever solved the problem? If yes, could you give us a hint? From that thread it seems the main issue was missing drivers. This should been fixed since the Lenny Beta1 release of the installer [1]: http://bugs.debian.org/443504 If there are remaining issues, please file an installation report (see [1] again). However, it is very likely that you'll not only need to describe the problem, but also the way to fix it. What is really missing is someone giving some love and care to the Debian Installer for sparc: we have not had any real sparc porting work done on the installer for ages. I do take basic care of it, but that really only extends to what needs doing to keep the installer working on my Ultra10. If people want support for top-of-the-line (or even just more recent) hardware, somebody will have to step up and get involved! Contact the debian-boot list if you're interested. Cheers, Frans Pop (member of D-I team) [1] Current versions of the installer are available from: http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-installer/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: speakup fixes
Builds fine here for sparc. Warnings (same for regular and -smp kernels): /home/fjp/projects/source/l-m-e/linux-modules-extra-2.6-2.6.25/debian/build/build_sparc_none_sparc64_speakup/speakup_keypc.c: In function ‘synth_immediate’: /home/fjp/projects/source/l-m-e/linux-modules-extra-2.6-2.6.25/debian/build/build_sparc_none_sparc64_speakup/speakup_keypc.c:115: warning: cast to pointer from integer of different size Cheers, FJP signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: disks on Ultra/1 not detected with esp_scsi on 2.6.24
David Miller wrote: > The following looks suspicious: > Apr 12 07:11:58 hw-detect: Missing modules 'esp (ESP SCSI), usb-storage > (USB storage) > > The esp_scsi module seems to have been loaded, but the sun_esp module > did not. This is probably what the problem is. Correct. We made a mistake while updating Debian Installer after the esp -> sun_esp rename, thinking that the rename was to esp_scsi. The sun_esp module is currently not even included in installer images. As it happens this was fixed yesterday in SVN and daily built Debian Installer images should be fixed as soon as we switch over to 2.6.25, which should be within the next two weeks or so. Sorry for any inconvenience. Cheers, FJP -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#485961: installation-reports: Installer can't locate CD-ROM drive (sparc)
On Tuesday 17 June 2008, Dennis Boone wrote: > Yesterday I successfully booted from my modified netinst CD, manually > loaded the sun_esp and esp_scsi modules, and the installer could then > detect the CD-ROM drive. I could see that drive and the SCSI hard disk > in /proc/scsi/scsi. Nice. > As a possibly separate issue, I'm now having trouble getting the > installer to recognize the hard disk. There are several things I need > to try, including moving that drive to SCSI ID 0. Check if it is visible in output of 'dmesg'. You should see the drive and partitions listed. If it is, you should also see it in /sys/block and the corresponding block device files in /dev/. If you have all that, try following commands from an installer debug shell: 'list-devices disk', 'list-devices partition'. If that lists the disk and partitions, partman should recognize it too. > Do you know when the 2.6.25 switch will occur? Soon, for somewhat flexible values of "soon". Try a few days after you get the mail that this report is closed. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#485961: installation-reports: Installer can't locate CD-ROM drive (sparc)
reassign 485961 linux-kernel-di-sparc-2.6 1.24 tags 485961 pending thanks On Sunday 15 June 2008, Dennis Boone wrote: > > Hmm. There is also a sun_esp module, which depends on esp_scsi. I > > wonder if that's the missing link here. > > > > I'll try this and see what happens. The catch would appear to be that > installer components live on the (as yet undetected) CD, so can't be > loaded to fetch the module. > > I've built a modified netinst CD with the module added, which I will > try tomorrow when I'm in the same room with the e3500. Maybe I even > built it correctly. :) After looking at this again I'm fairly certain that this is the real problem, so I've gone ahead and made the necessary changes. These changes I made should become effective in daily built installer images as soon as we switch over to the 2.6.25 kernel. A confirmation that loading sun_esp does indeed work for you would still be very much appreciated of course. Thanks for reporting the issue and for providing the info that helped me to spot the error. Cheers, FJP -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#485961: installation-reports: Installer can't locate CD-ROM drive (sparc)
On Thursday 12 June 2008, Dennis Boone wrote:
> Comments/Problems:
> The installer boots fine, and allows me to set keyboard, country
> locale, but cannot detect the CD-ROM
> (/[EMAIL PROTECTED],0/SUNW,[EMAIL PROTECTED],880/[EMAIL PROTECTED],0:f)
> drive to continue the
> installation.
> +SUNW,fas:FAS-336 ESP SCSI:esp_scsi:initrd
>
> POST/OBP outputs, and syslog are attached.
Thanks for all the info, but I'm afraid that my sparc knowledge is
insufficient here. Let's see if anyone on the debian-sparc list can help.
From the logs I can see that the esp_scsi module does get loaded, but it
does not seem to detect anything at all. Either something is missing
(basic scsi drivers?), or the hardware is just not supported by this
driver. I've googled around a bit but that did not help either.
We sometimes advise to netboot sparc systems where the CD is not
recognized, but that won't help if the harddisk is on the same
bus/controller and needs the same driver.
Anyone any idea what could be missing or if this hardware is supported by
linux at all? Here's basic hardware info; the installation report [1] has
more extensive logs.
5-slot Sun Enterprise E3500, No Keyboard
OpenBoot 3.2.24, 4096 MB memory installed, Serial #12336266.
Ethernet address 8:0:20:bc:3c:8a, Host ID: 80bc3c8a.
{a} ok probe-scsi-all
/[EMAIL PROTECTED],0/SUNW,[EMAIL PROTECTED],880
/[EMAIL PROTECTED],0/SUNW,[EMAIL PROTECTED],880
Target 6
Unit 0 Removable Read Only device TOSHIBA XM6201TASUN32XCD110312/12/97
Target e
Unit 0 Disk SEAGATE ST373405LC 22033EK1BBDY
Once we figure out what's needed, fixing the installer to support that is
probably trivial. The trick is in the first part.
Two things that may yet help:
- the output of lsmod after hardware detection (to see if anything obvious
is not loaded)
- just manually trying to modprobe any driver under
/lib/modules/../kernel/drivers/scsi and checking dmesg after each for
some sign of life
Cheers,
FJP
[1] http://bugs.debian.org/485961
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [panic] "Cheetah error trap taken" with Debian 2.6.24 kernel
On Tuesday 10 June 2008, David Miller wrote: > From: Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 00:03:53 +0200 > > > Cheetah error trap taken afsr[001008000500] afar > > [07f90080] TPC[553f94] TNPC[553f98] O7[554274] > > TSTATE[9980001606] > > TPC > > pci_get_rom_size() is being called with an I/O address that > isn't responding. It is being called via pci_map_rom() because > I see no drivers directly calling pci_get_rom_size(). > > Find out what device driver is calling this routine. Given that the screenshot shows that the line just before the crash is "radeonfb (0001:02:00.0): ATI Radeon [d" which looks truncated the most likely candidate looks to be drivers/video/aty/radeon_base.c (in __devinit radeon_map_ROM). That function even has some suspicious looking comments immediately above the call. Finding out for sure would probably require building a custom installer using a kernel with some added debugging statements. Is that needed? Cheers, FJP -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[panic] "Cheetah error trap taken" with Debian 2.6.24 kernel
Hi sparclinux devs (AKA David), We got a report on the Debian Sparc list of an installation issue involving a kernel panic. The thread so far is here: - http://lists.debian.org/debian-sparc/2008/05/msg00020.html - http://lists.debian.org/debian-sparc/2008/06/msg0.html (month split; both have follow-ups) Alexander Vlasov wrote: > Frans Pop planet.nl> writes: >> You could also try booting with BOOT_DEBUG=3. That will give you a >> debug shell at the earliest possible point. If the crash still happens, >> it's definitely a kernel or hardware issue. > > Haven't tried BOOT_DEBUG=3, but finally screenshoted the problem via KVM > Here is it: http://zulu.in.ua/screenshot.png OK, that seems pretty clear. This is still with the daily installer image, correct? Let's ask the kernel developers for advice as this panic comes from there (arch/sparc64/kernel/traps.c). First lines of the trap (see screenshot linked above for rest!): Cheetah error trap taken afsr[001008000500] afar [07f90080] TPC[553f94] TNPC[553f98] O7[554274] TSTATE[9980001606] TPC The kernel is either Debian kernel based on 2.6.24.4 (if the installer image is an older daily build) or 2.6.24.7 (if it is a current daily). Exact version can be checked if needed. I've added the original reporter in CC for easier follow-up. Cheers, FJP -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Linux boot hangs
Alexander Vlasov wrote: > I tried installer with debian-installer/framebuffer=false, but seems it > still uses framebuffer. Just fb=false should work as well. You could also try booting with BOOT_DEBUG=3. That will give you a debug shell at the earliest possible point. If the crash still happens, it's definitely a kernel or hardware issue. Did you try pulling the new video card, or disabling it with a kernel parameter? signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Linux boot hangs
Alexander Vlasov wrote: > I just downloaded netinst image from >http://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/daily-builds/daily/arch-latest/sparc/iso-cd/ > and tried to boot my Ultra45 (2xSltraSparc IIIi, 2G RAM, 2xSATA drives). > Booting hangs at the very early stage, right after initrd loading, with > screen full of info, but the only phrases I can understand there is > Cheetah error trap happens > Error from system bus > after this about 5-7lines of some dump follow. This "some dump" stuff is essential information. Please send the complete output on the display! > and a message like "press stop-a to return to OBP". Stop-a doesn't work > tho'. > Stable installer doesn't work here too -- it boots fine, but keyboard > doesn't work after kernel boot (it does in OBP and SILO, but stops working > on kernel boot). Keyboard is Type7 USB. It may be that the installer is completely missing support for either USB keyboards for sparc, or type7 keyboards. In either case, I'm not sure that using a daily build of the installer is going to change anything over the Etch version. OTOH, USB modules should be available and the keymaps we use on sparc are regular AT keymaps, which work with type5 keyboards (non-USB). What may be missing is the usbhid kernel module. We can still fix the daily version before the release of Lenny, but will need more info for that. We'd first need to fix the boot issue and then the keyboard issue. Cheers, FJP signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Ultra 10 install issue
Your mail is sadly lacking in any real info that could be used to actually help you forward. For what it's worth, I have an U10 myself with an ATI 3D Rage [0] on which most Debian releases since Sarge have been successfully installed. William Andrew Lawrence wrote: > I have an Ultra 10 that can run Sun Solaris 8 with no issue. I could use > the "sarge" install but it would fail in the middle of the install. Exactly how did it fail? Did you file an installation report [1]? Did you provide the syslog for the installation? > Now I have 4.03 downloaded and trying to do a Net install. I assume you mean 4.0r3. > Sadly, nothing. I can install 4.03, but here is the issue, it looks like > it is echoing the text, but offset by one character. Even after I finish > the install, basically by hitting enter to default the whole process, the > login screen comes up like this as well. I am including a link to a > picture of it http://www.alawrence.net/linux/ it's the only photo in > there. This happens after I get the welcome to screen and hit enter to > install. it loads the 8MB kernel and I can read that fine then when the > screen refreshes and has the penguin at the top it starts this echo issue So it looks like there is a problem in the Linux kernel in the display driver you are using. > I know it has two video cards, the one I am using displays the whole Exactly what video cards are they? Which one is the one that gets used? > install process, nothing is being sent to that other video card. That was > the first thing I checked. Then I have tried to pass parameters to the > boot loader to not use the frame buffer, but that doesn't seem to work > either. Maybe I am doing it wrong. If you'd told us what parameters you have tried, then maybe we could have told you... > The specs are: Ultra 10 with 512 MB RAM a 9.1 GIG IDE HD and openboot > version: 3.19 Specs of the video cards seem relevant here. Please try if the instructions here can help you further: http://d-i.alioth.debian.org/manual/en.sparc/ch05s03.html#sparc-boot-problems Alternatively, you could try an installation using serial console. Cheers, FJP [0] lspci info: :01:02.0 VGA compatible controller: ATI Technologies Inc 3D Rage I/II 215GT [Mach64 GT] (rev 9a) [1] http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-installer/report-template signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: esp_scsi in the debian installer
Nick Schmalenberger wrote: > I thought the esp scsi driver was supposed to be fixed in 2.6.23 or > 2.6.24, but on my Ultra/1 it isn't working with todays daily build of > the netboot installer. Attached are the debug logs. Has anybody had this > working? Thanks. I have a IDE-based Ultra10 myself, so can't test this. From the logs you sent I can see that esp_scsi is getting loaded (although I'm a little bit surprised at that since hw-detect still only lists esp as the module to be loaded, which explains the "missing modules" message). But it does indeed seem that your disks are not getting recognized. Could you try the following: - boot the installer in expert mode - proceed until just before the "Detect disks" phase - start a debug console - modprobe esp_scsi manually Is there anything interesting in the output of dmesg after that? If not, probably the best thing to do is to send the output of 'lsmod' and 'dmesg' and some info about your hardware to the upstream sparc kernel maintainers [1]. Cheers, FJP [1] [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [ss20]cdrom
On Tuesday 17 July 2007 23:35, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > The daily built images of the installer for sparc [1] have kernel > > 2.6.20. I don't know if the rewrite happened before or after that > > release, but it is somewhat more recent than the Etch kernel. > > The rewrite dates back to April [0] while 2.6.20 was released two > months earlier [1]. Apparently, the new ESP driver first appeared in > 2.6.22 [2]. In that case there is unfortunately extremely little chance that this will become available in Debian. The only option seems to be a self-compiled kernel. pgptALRA5GtpZ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [ss20]cdrom
(Please do _not_ CC people who obviously read the mailing list!) On Tuesday 17 July 2007 22:56, Chris Andrew wrote: > That's interesting. Do you know where I can download an ISO that has > the re-written module? I prefer debian, but at the moment, any linux > would do. The daily built images of the installer for sparc [1] have kernel 2.6.20. I don't know if the rewrite happened before or after that release, but it is somewhat more recent than the Etch kernel. Cheers, FJP [1] http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-installer/ pgpnnfyg83451.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [ss20]cdrom
On Tuesday 17 July 2007 17:58, Chris Andrew wrote: > All my CD's boot fine, it really look like a module isn't being loaded. > As I say, Sarg loads fine. The installer starts, and then hangs when > doing hardware detection for modules. Possibly this is covered by the errata for the Etch installer (esp module broken) [1]. It is one of the many issues that contribute to the decision to drop support for sparc32... [1] http://www.debian.org/releases/etch/debian-installer/ pgpmRFwVKBiG5.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Retiring the sparc32 port
On Sunday 15 July 2007 03:53, Austin Denyer wrote: > On Sat, 14 Jul 2007 18:08:57 -0700, Steven Ringwald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > I, for one, will be sorry to see it go, as I actively use my SS10's > > and 20's. Anyone know of any other Linux distros out there that > > support the Sparc32 architecture, or am I going to have to look into > > something like NetBSD going forward? > > I too will be sad to see it go. I love my SS5... Hi Steven and Denyer, We are *also* sad to see sparc32 go, but these kinds of messages are only a repeat of similar reactions on earlier threads. What we need to sparc32 alive - not only in Debian, but in Linux in general - is not people who are sad, but people who are willing to invest time and energy to fix the issues there are, to make sure sparc32 is supported in the software (kernel, toolchain, whatever) and who are committed to _keeping_ it maintained. Being sad unfortunately does not help with that at all. As to alternatives, what you should be looking for is somewhere where there is a vibrant sparc32 community, including people who are not just sad, but who are actually doing work to maintain the port. I have no idea if NetBSD has such a community or not. Cheers, FJP pgpHzlYzUt2Pp.pgp Description: PGP signature
[D-I] Kernel/module udebs status - massbuild script update
(Reply-to set to debian-boot list) kernel udeb status == Because I had to test the changes below anyway, I have done what I guess will be my last massbuild and upload of kernel/module udebs. All arches are now at 2.6.21-2, with the following exceptions: - sparc: at 2.6.20 because sparc32 is not enabled in 2.6.21; I've been waiting for a formal decision about whether sparc32 is going to be dropped for lenny or not [1]; Jurij Smakov is going to follow up on that soon - hppa: at 2.6.18 because the parisc64 kernels are seriously broken [2]; however, it may be better to update the kernel despite this - powerpc: at 2.6.18; until now we've never had all needed source packages available; I've asked Colin to do the update and hope he'll find time soon We'll switch the updated arches to 2.6.21-2 once they are through NEW. All up-to-date arches now have both loop-eas and squashfs module udebs, except: - arm: only loop-aes as squashfs is not available - m68k: has neither because loop-aes was never available and given current status of the arch it does not really make sense to upload for only squashfs massbuild script With the addition by Otavio of squashfs udebs to the linux-module-di packages (for the live CD project), a new version of the massbuild script was needed to support the fact that there are now two dependencies (binaries from loop-aes and linux-modules-extra-2.6). Today I have made the necessary changes and in the process merged the two previous scripts and the new script more generic. There were of course some challenges (especially the version numbering for squashfs). Some highlights: - desired version of dependencies is no longer passed as a parameter, but read from a file 'massbuild.versions' - the --incoming option will now make the build try incoming _after_ trying the regular mirror - a separate line is added in the changelog for each build dependency and specifies the version the package was built against - the '-m ' option will now _add_ an extra line in the changelog instead of overruling the default entries; if multiple lines are passed, they will be added as separate entries As all these changes IMO make the script mature enough, I have moved it to the packages/kernel directory in trunk. Cheers, FJP [1] So far this has only been discussed, but the project has not yet made a formal decision: - http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2007/05/msg7.html - http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2007/05/msg00804.html [2] http://bugs.debian.org/426391 pgpG6ce66XiHV.pgp Description: PGP signature
Fwd: Re: Libata PATA status - CMD64X on sparc
JFYI. In reply to [1], I checked the pata-cmd64x driver on my Ultra 10, with the results below. Cheers, FJP [1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=118348475410014&w=2 -- Forwarded Message -- Subject: Re: Libata PATA status - CMD64X on sparc Date: Wednesday 04 July 2007 18:31 From: Frans Pop <...> To: Alan Cox <...> On Wednesday 04 July 2007 14:15, you wrote: > The main thing to know is simply "does it work". Generally speaking > you'll get either total failure or success. Initially I compiled the driver into the kernel and booted without initrd; that failed. I then compiled it as a module and used an initrd for the boot; this booted without any problems. CD drive seems to work fine too. Guess I must have forgotten to enable something for the first case; probably the fact that I had scsi generic, disk and maybe target support modular? Should the kernel config check for that? Attached the dmesg for the boot and an lspci -nn. IMHO the dmesg lies a bit: sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Attached SCSI disk Despite using a PATA driver, they are _not_ scsi disks... Timing info from hdparm is similar for both drivers. > Good tests would be to unpack big archives and then verify them I created a gzipped tarball of my ~ (about 700MB) and then extracted that to a separate directory. A diff between the two trees showed no strange differences. So, good news I guess :-) Cheers, FJP --- 00:00.0 Host bridge [0600]: Sun Microsystems Computer Corp. Psycho PCI Bus Module [108e:8000] 00:01.0 PCI bridge [0604]: Sun Microsystems Computer Corp. Simba Advanced PCI Bridge [108e:5000] (rev 11) 00:01.1 PCI bridge [0604]: Sun Microsystems Computer Corp. Simba Advanced PCI Bridge [108e:5000] (rev 11) 01:01.0 Bridge [0680]: Sun Microsystems Computer Corp. EBUS [108e:1000] (rev 01) 01:01.1 Ethernet controller [0200]: Sun Microsystems Computer Corp. Happy Meal [108e:1001] (rev 01) 01:02.0 VGA compatible controller [0300]: ATI Technologies Inc 3D Rage I/II 215GT [Mach64 GT] [1002:4754] (rev 9a) 01:03.0 IDE interface [0101]: Silicon Image, Inc. PCI0646 [1095:0646] (rev 03) 02:01.0 Communication controller [0782]: Syba Tech Ltd Parallel Port Card 2xEPP [1592:0782] (rev 92) PROMLIB: Sun IEEE Boot Prom 'OBP 3.31.0 2001/07/25 20:36' PROMLIB: Root node compatible: Linux version 2.6.22-rc7 ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (gcc version 4.1.3 20070629 (prerelease) (Debian 4.1.2-13)) #2 Wed Jul 4 16:44:13 CEST 2007 ARCH: SUN4U Ethernet address: 08:00:20:9c:14:f5 PROM: Built device tree with 43301 bytes of memory. On node 0 totalpages: 130518 Normal zone: 895 pages used for memmap Normal zone: 0 pages reserved Normal zone: 129623 pages, LIFO batch:15 Built 1 zonelists. Total pages: 129623 Kernel command line: root=/dev/sda2 ro PID hash table entries: 4096 (order: 12, 32768 bytes) clocksource: mult[3] shift[16] clockevent: mult[4ccc] shift[32] Console: colour dummy device 80x25 Dentry cache hash table entries: 131072 (order: 7, 1048576 bytes) Inode-cache hash table entries: 65536 (order: 6, 524288 bytes) Memory: 1024688k available (2488k kernel code, 904k data, 152k init) [f800,3ff4a000] Calibrating delay using timer specific routine.. 599.74 BogoMIPS (lpj=1199497) Security Framework v1.0.0 initialized SELinux: Disabled at boot. Capability LSM initialized Mount-cache hash table entries: 512 NET: Registered protocol family 16 PCI: Probing for controllers. /[EMAIL PROTECTED],0: SABRE PCI Bus Module /[EMAIL PROTECTED],0: PCI IO[1fe0200] MEM[1ff] PCI: Scanning PBM /[EMAIL PROTECTED],0 ebus0: [auxio] [power] [SUNW,pll] [se] [su] [su] [ecpp] [fdthree] [eeprom] [flashprom] [SUNW,CS4231] power: Control reg at 1fff1724000 ... powerd running. SCSI subsystem initialized libata version 2.21 loaded. AUXIO: Found device at /[EMAIL PROTECTED],0/[EMAIL PROTECTED],1/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/[EMAIL PROTECTED],726000 /[EMAIL PROTECTED],0/[EMAIL PROTECTED],1/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/[EMAIL PROTECTED],0: Clock regs at 01fff100 Time: tick clocksource has been installed. NET: Registered protocol family 2 IP route cache hash table entries: 8192 (order: 3, 65536 bytes) TCP established hash table entries: 32768 (order: 6, 524288 bytes) TCP bind hash table entries: 32768 (order: 5, 262144 bytes) TCP: Hash tables configured (established 32768 bind 32768) TCP reno registered checking if image is initramfs... it is Freeing initrd memory: 2685k freed audit: initializing netlink socket (disabled) audit(1183560724.064:1): initialized VFS: Disk quotas dquot_6.5.1 Dquot-cache hash table entries: 1024 (order 0, 8192 bytes) io scheduler noop registered io scheduler anticipatory registered io scheduler deadline registered io scheduler cfq registered (default) PCI: Enabling device: (:01:02.0), cmd 82 Console: switching to mono PROM 80x34 rtc_init: no PC rtc found [drm] Initialized drm 1.1.0 20060810 /[EMAIL PRO
Re: Bug#403364: SunBlade 150 problems - can anyone confirm?
On Monday 02 July 2007 14:21, Emanuele Rocca wrote: > The "output to the wrong screen" issue is well known, here's last > upstream comment: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.sparc/7659 Thanks for the link. Does that address both the "ATI + creator3D" case and the "only ATI" case? What about the "red dots" issue? Is that already known upstream? pgpu0Kna3qTKz.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Bug#403364: SunBlade 150 problems - can anyone confirm?
On Monday 02 July 2007 13:44, jim watson wrote: > On my Sunblade100 this is fixed in debian unstable 2.6.21-1 but > video=atyfb:off is still needed anyway to avoid those red dots. Hmm. I seem to be having dejavu experiences in this thread... Is anybody currently trying to work with the upstream kernel people to get these issues resolved or is everybody just kind of looking at each other and hoping things will magically get resolved somehow? Debian is not the place where such issues get solved, you have to get onto the upstream list ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) or the kernel BTS (bugzilla.kernel.org). Both issues are probably already known upstream, but it is good to remind the upstream developers about them once in a while. Cheers, FJP pgpPZLdeB9Mu3.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: access to mips/mipsel/sparc machine
On Sunday 01 July 2007 16:14, Nigel Horne wrote: > Joachim Reichel wrote: > > I would like to investigate whether my package cgal is vulnerable to > > bug #431230 on mips, mipsel and sparc. I'm not a DD (so I can't use > > any official porter machines), but my key 153FF940 is signed by a DD. > > Is there someone willing to give me access to a machine? > > Qemu is your friend here - you can get access to Debian on all 3 > platforms that way! OTOH, it can also be dead slow (depending on your host system), which can be a problem especially for debugging. And I've personally never gotten sparc to work yet. pgpOqr3rWGLtq.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [OT] [sun]debian : setup
On Tuesday 12 June 2007 22:17, Eric Rapilly wrote: > Hi there; For my Debian on sun, I need some informations, because I'm > not familiar with debian; > 1 ° how to setup a fixed IP address ? > 2° how to indicate the IP address of the gateway, which I use to go on > internet Note that this question is in no way specific to sparc. As such it is really off-topic for this mailing list. Please use a general user mailing list instead next time (or even better, read some basic documentation first)! The short answer: 'man interfaces' As a slightly longer answer, this example config: $ cat /etc/network/interfaces # The loopback network interface auto lo iface lo inet loopback # The primary network interface auto eth0 iface eth0 inet static address 10.19.66.10 netmask 255.255.255.0 network 10.19.66.0 broadcast 10.19.66.255 gatway 10.19.66.1 Cheers, FJP pgpN46zfacJ0l.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Installation prompt does not appear during netboot install
On Sunday 13 May 2007 09:43, jim wrote: > Searching this list for "video=atyfb:off" suggests the advice should > just mention the symptom is the boot stops after "Booting Linux...". > Then it is not necessary to mention the hardware, although it seems > mainly reported for sunblade 100 & 150, but was reported for Ultra 10 > too, and other hardware might be affected but not reported here? > > For sunblade 100 at least I notice this is fixed in 2.6.20 but > video=atyfb:off is still needed to avoid the red dots (search this list > for "red dots" ;) As this is clearly a bug and less a structural issue, I don't feel it is appropriate to document it in the installation guide. I have just added it to the errata for Etch though (should show up after next update of the website): http://www.debian.org/releases/etch/debian-installer/index.en.html#errata Cheers, FJP pgp9Vy21g9Giz.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Etch on Netra X1
On Friday 01 June 2007 20:26, Jerome Warnier wrote: > Now it is closed, but I feel it should not be as this is > not definitive a solution, as Lenny will probably still have the same > problem. I agree that it is not definitive, but it is a basically an upstream kernel problem and not an installer, or even a Debian problem. As we do now have a good workaround and documentation we can point people to, I see no need to keep the BR against the installer open. Cheers, FJP pgpk5oUTQjGjS.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Etch on Netra X1
On Friday 01 June 2007 16:34, Jerome Warnier wrote: > The first important problem is that it tries to use the "dmfe" kernel > module for the NICs, and it doesn't work at all, while "tulip" does. The installation guide documents this issue and a way to work around it. http://www.debian.org/releases/etch/sparc/ch02s06.html.en#nics-sparc-trouble However, I see that that needs to be updated as in the mean time we have a better method: blacklisting the module when the installer is booted: http://www.debian.org/releases/etch/sparc/ch05s02.html.en#module-blacklist Cheers, FJP pgpqUrcDdrHcI.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Intention to drop sparc32 support for Lenny
On Tuesday 22 May 2007 16:03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > The main reason is the fact that sparc32 support is no longer being > > maintained upstream for the kernel [2]. A result of that is that the > > 2.6.21 kernel is currently broken, which forces the issue. > > It seems obvious that someone will *eventually* fix sparc32 support in > the kernel upstream. "Eventually" is not good enough. > Why the rush to kill off the port, without waiting a relatively sane > period of time for upstream issues to be fixed? Do you really think this is a decision that was made lightly? The problem is, and that has been mentioned before, that *there is no upstream maintainer* for sparc32. Unless some people step up and ensure that upstream issues _are_ fixed in a timely manner, sparc32 is effectively dead. Waiting 3 months (what you apparently consider a "sane" period) for a fix for major upstream breakage is _not_ acceptable for a release arch. Debian cannot afford to have a broken kernel for a release subarch for that period of time. Kernel development moves too fast for that. If the current issue is fixed in three months, there will probably be 5 new issues that will not be fixed and we'll still not have a working kernel. > This starts to sound like m68k part 2. No, it is completely different as m68k _does_ have a group of enthusiastic people behind it who actually work on upstream issues. sparc32 has none. Cheers, FJP pgpc4SbMVAWEy.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Intention to drop sparc32 support for Lenny
On Monday 21 May 2007 21:49, Martin Habets wrote: > FYI, 2.6.21 is rock solid on my SS20 here. Do you consider it broken > just because of some cdrom issues? Or is there more? I don't have more details than this: http://lists.debian.org/debian-kernel/2007/05/msg00305.html pgpP7XiSvJTe8.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: etch installation on sun blade 1000
On Monday 21 May 2007 16:48, Talecki Michał wrote: > Now it says: > "No disk drive was detected" Are there any messages in the output of dmesg that show whether the disk was detected or possibly any errors? Possibly it will show that the disk driver requires firmware. Loading firmware is currently not supported in the installer, but you can copy it into the correct location manually. Note that if that's the problem, you will also need to make sure the firmware is installed for the target system and regenerate the initramfs initrd before you reboot It this does not help, please file a full installation report [1]. We need to know at least exactly what image you are using and the lspci info to be able to help. Use the "Save debug logs" option in the main menu of the installer to include relevant log files (gzipped). Cheers, FJP [1] http://d-i.alioth.debian.org/manual/en.i386/ch05s03.html#submit-bug pgp9mIYW4wx6f.pgp Description: PGP signature
Intention to drop sparc32 support for Lenny
The sparc32 port has been struggling for some time. Last month Jurij Smakov, currently the most active Debian Sparc porter, raised the question if support sparc32 should be dropped for Lenny [1]. The main reason is the fact that sparc32 support is no longer being maintained upstream for the kernel [2]. A result of that is that the 2.6.21 kernel is currently broken, which forces the issue. Another reason is that dropping sparc32 support will allow optimization for sparc64 which will result in improved support for the modern sparc systems from Sun and Hitachi. Other distributions have already made this choice. Unless a group of people is willing to commit to providing the needed upstream kernel and toolchain support for sparc32, the Debian project will be forced to drop sparc32 for Lenny. Doing this early in the release cycle has the advantage of allowing sufficient time to work on optimizing support for sparc64. Given the current problems with sparc32 in the 2.6.21 kernel, the final decision on this will be made before the end of this month. Frans Pop [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-sparc/2007/04/msg00044.html [2] http://marc.info/?l=linux-sparc&m=117407830512186&w=2 pgpRz8jwQQLvd.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Dropping sparc32 for Lenny (was: Scheduling linux-2.6 2.6.21-[23])
On Friday 18 May 2007 14:05, Bastian Blank wrote: > I have to acknowledge the message from Dave[1]. Until there is a new > kernel upstream it may be possible to compile it but it is impossible > to fix real problems. Yes, I completely agree with that. However, when you casually propose to _deprecate_ (instead of temporarily disable) sparc32 as part of a kernel upload proposal, then I feel the discussion needs to be moved to a wider audience. On Friday 18 May 2007 14:12, Bastian Blank wrote: > On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 04:23:00AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > > Has there been any input from the sparc porters on this last change? There are very few really active porters for sparc. Most active over the past couple of years has been Jurij Smakov, and he launched the proposal to drop sparc32. > > I agree with Frans that regardless of the upstream status, this isn't > > a change to be made without their consent. > > The given thread shows noone which intends to step in. And the process > to find a consent there seems to be failed. Correct. And I said as much in my mail. My take on the thread is that the general consensus among DDs is that it is unavoidable. Some users argue for continuation, but no one seems willing to step in and the work needed for that. Basically I'm in favor of dropping sparc32 (though also a bit sad about dropping support for yet another class of hardware). The arguments in favor of dropping it are pretty strong. I'd be satisfied if the project would reach that decision in this thread. pgpLG2r0LS92y.pgp Description: PGP signature
Dropping sparc32 for Lenny (was: Scheduling linux-2.6 2.6.21-[23])
(Resending as I forgot to change the subject. Sorry about that.) On Friday 18 May 2007 12:18, Bastian Blank wrote: > I'd like to schedule the linux-2.6 2.6.21-[23] upload for today. > > Fixes: [...] > - sparc32 deprecation? No fix yet for the cmpxchg problem. This would have a serious implication for Debian Installer as we'd also have to drop support for sparc32 if this is done. The deprecation of sparc32 has been raised last month on the debian-sparc list [1] by Jurij Smakov with as main reason that there is basically no longer any upstream (kernel) support for sparc32. Other reasons were listed as well. In that thread there was some opposition to the idea, but I've not seen anybody making the commitment to maintain sparc32, so dropping it for Lenny does seem logical. However, I do not think this is a decision that should be made solely on the debian-kernel list. I also feel that the decision (when it has been made) should be announced to our users. Cheers, FJP [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-sparc/2007/04/msg00044.html This mail also lists the arguments for dropping sparc32. pgpXWIRCI4lyX.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Scheduling linux-2.6 2.6.21-[23]
On Friday 18 May 2007 12:18, Bastian Blank wrote: > I'd like to schedule the linux-2.6 2.6.21-[23] upload for today. > > Fixes: [...] > - sparc32 deprecation? No fix yet for the cmpxchg problem. This would have a serious implication for Debian Installer as we'd also have to drop support for sparc32 if this is done. The deprecation of sparc32 has been raised last month on the debian-sparc list [1] by Jurij Smakov with as main reason that there is basically no longer any upstream (kernel) support for sparc32. Other reasons were listed as well. In that thread there was some opposition to the idea, but I've not seen anybody making the commitment to maintain sparc32, so dropping it for Lenny does seem logical. However, I do not think this is a decision that should be made solely on the debian-kernel list. I also feel that the decision (when it has been made) should be announced to our users. Cheers, FJP [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-sparc/2007/04/msg00044.html This mail also lists the arguments for dropping sparc32. pgpQQfwnNgB85.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Installation prompt does not appear during netboot install
On Friday 11 May 2007 17:13, Emanuele Rocca wrote: > * Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [2007-05-11 17:12 +0200]: > > On Friday 11 May 2007 17:06, H C Pumphrey wrote: > > > This link talks about having two cards. But on some hardware > > > (SunBlade 100 for example) you need it even if you have only one > > > card, because the ATI framebuffer code the kernel locks up hard. > > > > Ah, I was not aware of that. Could someone who's experienced the > > issue propose an updated text that covers that? > > I guess that booting with video=atyfb:off (as suggested in the > document) should work. Duh. What I am looking for a description of the situation where this occurs (on which hardware for example). On my Ultra 10 it is not needed. pgpDyq2edoABu.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Installation prompt does not appear during netboot install
On Friday 11 May 2007 17:06, H C Pumphrey wrote: > Frans Pop wrote: > > On Friday 11 May 2007 11:48, Pravin Jeeanah wrote: > >> I am trying to netboot an etch install on a sparc > >> ultra1. When I issue the boot net command at the OBP > >> prompt the system downloads the install kernel and > >> boot directly after the message ...remapping kernel. > > > > http://www.debian.org/releases/etch/sparc/ch05s03.html.en#sparc-boot- > >problems > > This link talks about having two cards. But on some hardware (SunBlade > 100 for example) you need it even if you have only one card, because > the ATI framebuffer code the kernel locks up hard. Ah, I was not aware of that. Could someone who's experienced the issue propose an updated text that covers that? pgp3EH8dUS9Zc.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Installation prompt does not appear during netboot install
On Friday 11 May 2007 11:48, Pravin Jeeanah wrote: > I am trying to netboot an etch install on a sparc > ultra1. When I issue the boot net command at the OBP > prompt the system downloads the install kernel and > boot directly after the message ...remapping kernel. http://www.debian.org/releases/etch/sparc/ch05s03.html.en#sparc-boot-problems pgp1l0EvslWM9.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [MAISun Blade 100 Etch install - need /etc/silo.conf [SOLVED]
On Wednesday 09 May 2007 23:10, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote: > DEBIAN_FRONTEND=text was needed because the newt frontend doesn't show > up and because the Sun screen doesn't show well in a Unicode locale. What's the output of 'cat /proc/fb' after booting the installer? pgpRXjUym55hJ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Kernel update problems
On Sunday 29 April 2007 09:49, gavin duley wrote: > Could anyone suggest what the problem is, and maybe what I could do to > fix it? 1) File a bug report against yaird; the problem is there 2) Use initramfs-tools in the mean time Cheers, FJP pgpybS6Zm4g9G.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: can't find the Debian script that creates sparc boot CDs
On Friday 27 April 2007 05:33, Ivan Kabaivanov wrote: > I need to create my own sparc-bootable CD and where better to learn > than from debian-sparc. What's the script that creates the debian > sparc cds and where do I find it so I can study it? All Debian CDs are built using the "debian-cd" package. You can either install the package or get it from SVN: svn+ssh://svn.debian.org/svn/debian-cd/trunk Cheers, FJP pgpkBxI7X0fOY.pgp Description: PGP signature
[D-I] Updating kernel udebs to 2.6.20
Hello D-I porters, Most architectures should now be able to switch to 2.6.20 for D-I (except for arm, hppa and m68k). i386 and amd64 have already been switched. Over the past two weeks Joey has done the needed work for i386 and amd64 (and necessary updates in kernel-wedge), but we've waited with this call until #419458 was resolved (which it was in 2.6.20-3). As this is a fairly big jump (2.6.18 to 2.6.20), please check carefully for new modules that should be included in the udebs. If any updates in kernel-wedge are needed, please let us know (or do them yourself). I suggest that you check the kernel-wedge changelog for an overview of the changes made there. Please also check pending changes already committed in SVN by Joey or me. Note that although new PATA modules were added in kernel-wedge, most of these are not actually available yet in the kernel as a result of #419458. After you upload the new linux-kernel-* package, I will make sure that the linux-modules-* (loop-aes modules) will also be uploaded for your architecture. For mips(el): In input-modules for bcm* kernels, usbmouse is currently included. AFAIK that module should not be needed and that module could be removed. Cheers, FJP pgpfBS04mdRex.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Strange problem with ethernet after upgrade.
On Wednesday 25 April 2007 10:35, Patrick Caulfield wrote: > This makes no sense to me. I suppose it's possible that the new udev > has had some hand in renaming the device but it still seems odd. Check /etc/udev/rules.d/z25_persistent-net.rules for that. I doubt udev has anything to do with the reduced speed though. Suggest you check dmesg and maybe use mii-diag for that. pgpAQBoOhOLX9.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Dropping sparc32 for lenny
On Wednesday 25 April 2007 09:01, BERTRAND Joël wrote: > Thus dropped sparc32 arch will be a big strategic error for Debian. You and others seem to be missing the point of this discussion and proposal. This is not about Debian _wanting_ to drop sparc32, but about a total lack of upstream support for sparc32 which _forces_ Debian to drop it. Jurij has made quite clear in his initial message that sparc32 can only be kept alive if the people who want sparc32 supported start contributing in a major way to kernel and toolchain maintenance. If nobody volunteers for that, than you can complain as much as you like that Debian is making the wrong decision, but it does not change the facts: a (sub)architecture that has no volunteers is dead! And so far in this thread, I've seen nobody volunteering to do any actual work to keep sparc32 alive... You cannot expect the one or two active Debian sparc porters to keep the sparc32 alive for you if the rest of the community (inside and outside Debian) is unwilling to do their part. Cheers, FJP pgpE0KOYlqOWl.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Dropping sparc32 for lenny
On Sunday 15 April 2007 23:56, Robert Reif wrote: > davem has considered combining sparc and sparc64 kernel trees like s390 > and ppc did and i386/x86_64 are considering doing. This would go a > long way in keeping the two architectures from diverging further and > help sparc32 stability. I know it's a long shot but possible and would > address the first two issues Any references to support that and that show that David is still considering this a viable option and he or others are willing to do the necessary work? As long as it's only a long shot and nobody is actually working on this, I don't see how its really relevant to the decision Debian now has to make. pgpxZVJb0vvGN.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Dropping sparc32 for lenny
On Sunday 15 April 2007 23:22, Robert Reif wrote: > Jurij Smakov wrote: > >* Nearly complete lack of upstream support. David Miller, current > > upstream maintainer of sparc64 has expressed his thoughts on the > > topic in [0], triggering the discussion about dropping sparc32 > > support in Aurora Linux. [1] > >* Several serious problems, like lack of SMP support and driver > > failures (CD-ROMs do not work for some reason). > >* Shrinking userbase, flaky hardware. > > Why can't you have official sparc32 and sparc64 ports? > That way you can optimize sparc64 and still have sparc32 support. Any reason why you completely ignoring the first three (and probably most important) reasons for dropping sparc32? pgpnolxxuJTvf.pgp Description: PGP signature
[sparc] Automatic sbus module loading (was: Adding Emanuele Rocca to the team)
On Sunday 15 April 2007 22:23, maximilian attems wrote: > i'd like to have sbus udev module loading solved :) Here are the important bits from a discussion on that subject from #debian-boot earlier today. trave11er: We also need to investigate why kernel/udev don't load sbus modules yet. I suspect it may just be a missing udev rule. After all, sysfs support is supposed to be implemented. Though I'm not quite sure what's responsible for actually loading a module: the kernel itself or udev or something else. the way i remember it: there is modules.alias file, which contains things like alias pci:v100Bd0500sv*sd*bc*sc*i* scx200 udev gets this modalias from every device it detects, and then modprobe it so, the possibilities are a) udev is not getting the correct modalias for sbus devices; b) there is no correct entry in modules.alias for them first should be possible to check with udevinfo or something with access to an sbus system... hm hmm, does sbus support modalias? waldi: supposedly, davem recently hacked in the support for it well, for sysfs at least no sign in HEAD at least waldi: the sbus devices do show up in sysfs don't know whether this implies that udev should be able to handle them modpost is not able to extract sbus infos which are needed to use modalias aha I suppose that modpost is scripts/mod/modpost.c in the kernel source tree. Possibly additional changes will be needed to actually use sbus mappings in /lib/modules//modules.alias. I also wonder if anything extra is needed to also generate a "modules.sbusmap" file. pgpN6oG57ggGc.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: sparc32 net install base installer failure
On Sunday 15 April 2007 16:31, Robert Reif wrote: > I have been unable to do a net install for the last few days. > > I get the following error (hand copied): > > apt-install: Setting up initramfs-tools (0.85g) > main-menu[1764]: (process:17153): > /var/lib/dpkg/info/base-installer.postinst: eval: 1: > addmodule_initrd_tools: not found http://bugs.debian.org/419062 maybe? If not, file a bug report against initramfs-tools. pgpugQEKxrc2L.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: md (software) RAID missing in the installer for sparc
On Wednesday 04 April 2007 17:19, Josip Rodin wrote: > But there is no problem with silo-installer, it's partman that needs to > take care of this. I checked the partman-md bug list, and found > #411756, where I've now concurred. No, the bit that does the check in partman is part of silo-installer! http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/d-i/trunk/packages/arch/sparc/silo-installer/finish.d/?rev=0&sc=0 /me is kind of expected to know what he's talking about :-) pgpcP585ySZNj.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: md (software) RAID missing in the installer for sparc
On Wednesday 04 April 2007 16:46, Josip Rodin wrote: > If software RAID wasn't supposed to be used on the SILO boot device at > all, then this code wouldn't be here. Please file a BR against silo-installer with a summary of this thread. pgpTyFbrUdTBq.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: md (software) RAID missing in the installer for sparc
On Sunday 01 April 2007 15:24, Josip Rodin wrote: > But... that's not actually supposed to be necessary. Quoting: [...] > | The first partition has to be ext3 or fd, not swap because swap > | writes from first block and avoid silo block. If swap begins on the > | cylinder 1, openprom cannot boot (ther is not MBR on sparc > | architecture). > > This was in reply to another person's question, and that person (who > had a problem) had swap as the first partition. I don't see how you conclude one from the other. AFAIK RAID also writes its signatures on the first block and this causes the same problem as swap does. (No idea what "fd" stands for.) Anyway, I trust the sparc porters (Fabio in this case) on this. I may have confused disklabel with silo data. The fact remains that RAID is only supported in D-I on partitions that do not start at the beginning of the disk. pgpfhmnXioxFg.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: md (software) RAID missing in the installer for sparc
On Sunday 01 April 2007 14:18, Josip Rodin wrote: > I couldn't help but notice that there is no support for software RAID > arrays in the sparc installer. It _is_ supported, but the option "Use as RAID" will not be shown if the current partition starts on sector 0 of the disk because that would overwrite the Sun disklabel info. So, to set up RAID on sparc, first create a small (/boot) partition and then create a second partition to set up as RAID. pgpSfROIOywgU.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: 'Illegal instruction' during boot
On Sunday 01 April 2007 12:38, Josip Rodin wrote: > Do I have to write a bug report, if I can commit to debian-doc CVS? :) No, feel free. Finding a good place for it may be tricky though as it affects both installs and installed systems. pgpy7CZMERBHM.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: 'Illegal instruction' during boot
On Sunday 01 April 2007 11:47, Josip Rodin wrote: > On Sat, Mar 31, 2007 at 02:05:54PM +, Mark Morgan Lloyd 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! > > Should we add a small note about this into the release notes? (Frans?) If we can identify which systems are affected and someone provides a text, sure. Suggest you file a BR against release-notes with the proposed text. pgp2SNpIjSq8j.pgp Description: PGP signature
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
Re: Major bug in mysql build (all versions since 4.1)
On Sunday 25 March 2007 20:58, BERTRAND Joël wrote: > "has been fixed" ? I have tried to build mysql with _all_ gcc release > between 3.3 and 4.1 without any success. Where have you seen that this > bug was fixed ? http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=334339;msg=66 pgp6Wohi1UrMF.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Major bug in mysql build (all versions since 4.1)
tags 334339 - wontfix thanks On Sunday 25 March 2007 20:02, BERTRAND Joël wrote: > See bug #334339 (wontfix). IMO the "wontfix" tag is not correct. There should at least be an explanation by the maintainer _why_ he considers this an issue that is does not need to be fixed. Removing the tag as it was added without any justification. AFAICT this is a real issue that should be solved. > Bug was reported to mysql dev without > success because dev have said that is a gcc-4.0 bug, not a mysql bug. Yes, but the gcc maintainers have said that the bug there has been fixed "long ago". Unfortunately they don't say in which version. > Maybe, but I think it is not very difficult to fix the configure.in > script to avoid this bug. I have no idea about that and no idea how that would affect other architectures. Anyway, It is now probably too late to fix this for Etch. Cheers, FJP pgpGIxGTMDUDt.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Major bug in mysql build (all versions since 4.1)
On Sunday 25 March 2007 19:18, BERTRAND Joël wrote: > I use for a long time mysql server on several sparc64 workstations > running debian testing. I have to rebuild mysql when I need to upgrade > these systems. Endeed, due to a bug in gcc, I have to rebuild the > debian package, and after configure stage, I stop the process, edit > config.h to undef : This may sound weird, but: have you ever reported this as a bug against mysql or gcc? If you experience problems in Debian, the normal route is to file a bug report. In this case you could even justify making the bug report "release critical". If you have not, that would be a great pity as we are now very close to the release of Etch. You say that you have seen this "a long time", so there would have been time to fix it. I'm not sure if there is still time now... pgpdFGjVGlH5P.pgp Description: PGP signature
D-I RC2 images available for testing
(BCC to d-ports) For all architectures, except for m68k, installer and CD/DVD images of what is going to be D-I RC2 are now available for testing. RC2 is scheduled to be the D-I release shipped with Etch. Netboot, floppy and hd-media images are available from: http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian/dists/etch/main/installer-/rc2/images/ CD/DVD images are available from: http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-installer/ We already have some test results for i386, amd64, arm, hppa, ia64 and s390. Tests for ia64 and s390 have shown minor issues that are being worked on. Please test these images for "your" architecture(s) and file an installation report [1] with the test results. Cheers, FJP [1] http://d-i.alioth.debian.org/manual/en.i386/ch05s03.html#submit-bug pgp9SBmcpS3dm.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Trying to install Unstable onto Netra 240 fails
On Saturday 03 March 2007 20:26, Per Larsson wrote: > Any hints on how to solve this ? Yes, download a new image. This issue has already been solved. pgpTb3vl60eIH.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Firebird on SPARC
On Saturday 03 March 2007 19:14, Stuart Brady wrote: > On Sat, Mar 03, 2007 at 07:11:39PM +0100, Frans Pop wrote: > > No, firefox = iceweasel; firebird = icedove (at least, AFAIK). > > firefox = iceweasel, thunderbird = icedove. :-) Oh, well. I stand corrected. pgpPemW4iSik8.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Firebird on SPARC
On Saturday 03 March 2007 19:04, Martin Marques wrote: > Frans Pop escribió: > > On Saturday 03 March 2007 16:00, Daniel Smolik wrote: > >> have anybody experience why is not Firebird in repository for SPARC > >> ? > > > > Look for icedove. Same thing. > > That would be FireFox, not Firebird, which is a DB engine. No, firefox = iceweasel; firebird = icedove (at least, AFAIK). pgpYVvmFIy8TE.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Firebird on SPARC
On Saturday 03 March 2007 16:00, Daniel Smolik wrote: > have anybody experience why is not Firebird in repository for SPARC ? Look for icedove. Same thing. pgp8jHtwwtbMP.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Sarge on SPARCstations etc.
On Friday 02 March 2007 15:37, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote: > R3 is unable to load any network driver. r3 was known to be broken: http://www.debian.org/releases/sarge/debian-installer/index.en.html#errata r4 was verified to work again. Note that issues with Sarge installations for Sparc are unlikely to be fixed anymore. Etch is soon to be released, so IMO testing that is much more useful than spending a lot of time on Sarge. Cheers, FJP pgpaQcq46IUBD.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Sarge on SPARCstations etc.
On Friday 02 March 2007 12:05, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote: > Unfortunately whatever underlies the "Detecting discs and all other > hardware" message grinds to a halt with a flashing cursor at the bottom > left of a blank screen... work continues but is there a trace anywhere > that shows what's going on? It's almost all shell script, so debugging is as simple as it can be. Just find the postinst script corresponding to the menu item being run, add a 'set -x' and you're off. Debugging will be in the syslog. If you've already got the network set up, start the web server option in "Save debug logs" and use a webbrowser to view the syslog. pgpJBItswYRsq.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Sarge on SPARCstations etc.
On Thursday 01 March 2007 15:24, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote: > This is purely for information in case nobody else has checked > recently. I'm not complaining, I'm not expecting anybody to fix things. > OTOH since Sarge is the last Debian likely to be qualified for 32-bit > SPARC it's a pity usability is decaying. This is not true. Etch _will_ support sparc32, though only sun4m systems. pgpZWzfOixLpT.pgp Description: PGP signature
D-I RC2 - Revisited
Hi all, As you've probably noticed, what's intended to be the final kernel for Etch has been uploaded yesterday. I'm currently building and uploading the kernel udebs for all arches (except arm and m68k for which images are not yet available). I'll also upload new loop-aes module udebs for Sparc as those were binNMUed because of a silent ABI change for sparc32. This means we can also have another go at releasing RC2. As this weekend is Fosdem and as we have to wait until the kernel is ready to migrate anyway, I will start the release process for RC2 early next week. This will include a last upload of udebs with translation updates and a few with minor pending changes. It also means that this is the last chance to make any (important) changes before RC2. If there is anyting that still needs to be done before RC2 (either general or architecture specific), please met me know by replying to the debian-boot list. Note that after RC2 has been released, it will in principle *no longer be possible* to migrate to testing packages that produce udebs if those udebs are included in any D-I initrd. I will check with RMs if there's anything in the pipeline before starting the build and upload of the installer. Cheers, FJP pgpb4HVRWPoCV.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [sun]install
On Thursday 22 February 2007 19:03, Daniel Smolik wrote:
> You can boot machine over net this is way that I prefer. To OK prompt
> type boot net prepare RARP and tftp server and download image from
>
> ftp://ftp.debian.cz/pub/debian/dists/sarge/main/installer-sparc/current
>/images/sparc64/netboot/2.6/boot.img If you have Sparc64.
That only helps if you have a second machine which is configured as a tftp
server...
To boot from CD-ROM, you need to give the command "boot cdrom" at the open
firmware prompt (open firmware is the Sun equivalent of BIOS).
When you power on the machine, do you get to the open firmware prompt
("ok")?
If not and you have a Sun keyboard, you can probably get there by
pressing "Stop-A" (top-left function key on the left of the keyboard +
the "A" key).
pgpcH7yf7ldnL.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: Sun Blade 2000
On Wednesday 21 February 2007 01:25, Emanuele Rocca wrote: > I've tried using reiserfs for the root partition, but silo doesn't work > with filesystems which are not ext3/ext2/ufs; it would be very cool > IMHO to warn the user about that if he tries to use something different > from ext3/ext2. I know that one should RTFM before installing, but > going through the whole installation just to realize that the machine > won't boot, err, sucks. Please file a BR against silo-installer for that. A patch would be great too ;-) Cheers, FJP pgpG7fJrACBQr.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: new user
On Monday 19 February 2007 22:31, Daniel Smolik wrote: > > At the moment testing the daily builds [1] of the installer would be > > very useful. Please file an installation report [1] for each type of > > machine. > > Yes I can do this but I prefer install over net. Because this image is > small and thi machines are conected to the net over 512Kb line. "Daily builds" include _all_ installation methods: floppy (for sparc32), netboot, hd-media, CD-ROM, DVD. Testing the netboot images is excellent, but also testing other methods occasionally helps ensure that all methods work and would be much appreciated. pgp4HEGdiyRr1.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: new user
On Monday 19 February 2007 22:01, Daniel Smolik wrote: > I have requested 2x E450, 1xE250, 1x SS5 and 1x Ultra5 all machines > have for playing. On all I run Debian Sid. I would like help with > testing. That's excellent. Testing installations with Debian Installer periodically is very useful. So is testing kernels before or just after they are uploaded and maybe checking that X.Org runs correctly. Note that testing becomes an awful lot more useful if you can also invest some time in tracing any issues that you might discover. At the moment testing the daily builds [1] of the installer would be very useful. Please file an installation report [1] for each type of machine. Cheers, FJP [1] http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-installer/ [2] http://d-i.alioth.debian.org/manual/en.i386/ch05s03.html#submit-bug pgpgm1t02B94o.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Please test the new kernel (2.6.18.dfsg.1-9)
On Thursday 01 February 2007 09:08, Robert Waldner wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/tmp/a# gunzip 25147 blocks > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/tmp/a# find . -name esp\* > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/tmp/a# > > No esp.ko :( That is expected. Reason is that the sysfs support in the esp driver is not complete enough yet for automatic detection/inclusion. So you need to manually add esp to /etc/initramfs-tools/modules. For new installations, the Debian Installer takes care of that. Cheers, FJP pgpSETUwy817x.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Please test the new kernel (2.6.18.dfsg.1-9)
On Tuesday 30 January 2007 12:04, Karl Goetz wrote: > When would we be expecting updated installer images? We're making the switch today. If there are no problems, tomorrows *daily built* images for all arches should use the new kernel. Cheers, FJP pgp5Pnpz5oj6e.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Please test the new kernel (2.6.18.dfsg.1-9)
On Monday 29 January 2007 07:18, Karl Goetz wrote: > I downloaded the daily intall image on 27th this month, my time (+10~), > and It failed to install (installer failed to start) on my SunBlade > 100. I dont have sarge or etch debs yet (i should get them in a few > days), but unless my daily is just-pre kernel update, i still cant > install. kk The installer does not yet use the new kernel. We will make the switch later this week. pgpWtcT8qZoxd.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Installation manual updates -- still open
On Sunday 31 December 2006 11:41, Chris Newport wrote: > On Sun, 31 Dec 2006, Frans Pop wrote: > >> 3.5.1 mentions the 1GB magic boundary -- silo will sometimes refuse > >> to boot the kernel, if it is physically located beyond the 1GB from > >> the start of the disk. I believe, however that this applies only to > >> sparc32 machines, is that correct? > > Early Sparc32 machines assume an early disk VTOC limitation. The root > filesystem must be on the first slice and no slice should exceed 2Gb. > This is an OBP issue. The only cure is to put the root (including > /boot) filesystem on the first slice and limit its size to 1024Mb. > AFAIK this only affects Sun4C machines which may not work with 2.6 > kernels anyway. That means that the two sentences that cover that issue can be deleted. > >> 5.1.4: How relevant is Sun NVRAM FAQ linked from this section for > >> us? > > Most older machines will have expired NVRAM batteries which should be > fixed using this FAQ before attempting to install an operating system. > Probably the most frequent problem with older machines. OK. Let's leave that in then. Thanks for the info Chris. Cheers, FJP pgpF5BUx4sVZF.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Installation manual updates -- still open
OK. Here is the list of issues that are still open. Some help from the community with some of these would be much appreciated, Cheers, FJP On Tuesday 03 October 2006 06:41, Jurij Smakov wrote: > Chapter 2.4 - "Purchasing Hardware Specifically for GNU/Linux". This > is probably not useful. Agree, but I don't feel like adding an architecture condition now. > Section 3.3.1.2 links to "Linux for SPARC Processors FAQ", which was > last updated in 2003. Is it still useful? Any newer sources of > information? Well, quite a lot of HW is from around that time or older. If anyone knows a more current source, that would be welcome. > Section 3.3.2 mentions "BIOS setup screens of your computer". Can > we replace it with something about PROM, which would be more relevant? Yes, that would definitely be worthwhile. Are there many differences between subarches or is OpenProm basically the same for all Suns? > It would be good to list the archives of debian-sparc list as a source > of information, perhaps with a specific query for the search engine > (like 'foo bar site:lists.debian.org inurl:debian-sparc). Would be good in general. There already is at least one reference to the list now though (for subscription, not the archives). > 3.5.1 mentions the 1GB magic boundary -- silo will sometimes refuse to > boot the kernel, if it is physically located beyond the 1GB from the > start of the disk. I believe, however that this applies only to > sparc32 machines, is that correct? Anyone know this? > 3.5.1 also mentions that silo can boot from romfs, I don't think it's > true. Or this? > 3.6.2 talks about the need to set different environment variables, > depending on the OpenBoot version. Probably worth to mention the 'show > .version' command to display this version. Also, I believe that neither > of machines we support is still using OpenBoot 1.x, so we can just > remove instructions for these versions. It also mentions 'eeprom' > command on Solaris, this command is available in Debian too, as a part > of sparc-utils package. > 4.4.1: check that .enet-addr command really returns the MAC address of > the network card. Also it should be verified somehow that *all* > commands still work on newer Solaris versions (anybody with a working > Solaris system?) Both skipped for now. > 5.1.3: Note about broken firmware for Ultra 10 - is it relevant > anymore? No idea. Guess it could be for someone who gets an old box with very old firmware from the scrapyard and tries Debian on it... Anyway, the references are still valid so I've left it in. > 5.1.4: How relevant is Sun NVRAM FAQ linked from this section for us? Any comments? > 5.2: What is the command to set the console to selected framebuffer > (given that more than one is available?). Will console=/dev/fb0 work? > Last sentence should mention that the serial devices designators ttya > and ttyb are valid in PROM only. Hmm. If that could work for the dual card issue... I doubt that console=/dev/fb0 would do it, but you never know. > C.5.1: check for accuracy. AFAICT it is correct, but an extra check couldn't hurt. pgpKSbVaIg06f.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Installation manual updates -- done
Hi Jurij, Thanks a lot for taking the time to go through the whole manual. I've gone through the issues and fixed a number of them; quite a few had already been fixed by changes since your review. There are also a few issues in this mail that are not yet fixed, but that could be fixed really easily if I can get the correct info or a second opinion. I'll follow up with issues that are still open in a separate mail. Cheers, FJP On Tuesday 03 October 2006 06:41, Jurij Smakov wrote: > Table in section 2.1.1 should list only sun4m, sun4u and sun4v as > supported sparc flavours. Done. > Sections 2.1.3 and 2.1.4 are, in my opinion, redundant, and can be > safely dropped. Information about supported graphics options and > SMP support is included in the corrected version of the 2.1.2 > chapter. Done based on your patch. > In section 2.2.2: "CD-ROM based installation is supported for some > architectures" - this statement is overly generic and redundant. May > be removed? Not sure. It kind of covers the fact that the statement be not be true for the arch for which the manual is being read. We could remove it if we had a "supports-cd" condition, which we currently don't. > Chapter 2.2.6 contains the list of supported SCSI devices. Does this > list only includes the drivers included in initrd? Probably needs to > be updated. It probably makes more sense to just replace it with a generic statement that says "all SCSI devices supported by the kernel are supported", and maybe list any SUN specific devices (as I've done for networking in current version on alioth [1]). Can you suggest something quickly? > Also, in section 2.4.2 "Fake or Virtual Parity > RAM" there is a sentence "f you want complete information on SPARC > RAM issues, and what is the best RAM to buy, see the PC Hardware FAQ", > linking to the PC Hardware FAQ. I very much doubt that this FAQ > contains any information on SPARC RAM. Already removed. > In chapter 2.5 the requirement of at least 32MB of RAM is listed. I > think that should be bumped to 64MB (or someone should really confirm > that install with 32 megs is possible). Will test that tomorrow. 32 may still work actually. I'm not sure if I tested that for Sparc when I last did my lowmem tests. > List of the supported network hardware in section 2.6 - needs to be > updated. Done, or at least changed. Could you check if any Sparc specific info is missing? Or maybe that should just be dropped? > Chapter 3.4 lists recommended minimum system requirements, and "no > desktop" option mentions 24MB. That does not agree with section 2.5 > and I really doubt that you can install with 24MB. Anyone volunteers > to check? See comment above. Inconsistency well spotted, will update. > Somewhere around here the bug in parted (probably) should be mentioned, > which leads to misdetection of disk sizes, if the machine has a disk > label created by Solaris. Recreating the disk label with Debian will > *not* resolved it, the only way to work around it so far is to dd the > first few kilobytes of the affected drive with zeros. Bug 384653, for > example. Anybody can try and reproduce it and provide debugging > information? Mentioned now in: http://d-i.alioth.debian.org/manual/en.sparc/ch06s03.html#di-partition > Links to "Sun Openboot Reference" in 3.6.2 does not work anymore, needs > to be updated. Google gave me this link; updated. Is that correct? http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/805-4436 > There is a stray dot at the start of the line "In older revisions..." > in 3.6.2. Fixed. > Not sure what to do with section 3.6.3, pretty confident that this > information is irrelevant for sparc. Cleaned out old cruft. The para is now no longer printed for Sparc. > 4.4.4/4.4.5: default package providing tftp server is tftpd. Default > directory from which the images are served is /srv/tftp, needs to be > updated. Section was partially updated recently and better explains how to check for location used. For tftpd-hpa (which is recommended), the default is /var/lib/tftpboot. What do you use? > 4.4.5.1: A bit more explanation about how image names are constructed? > On my system the requested file name is logged in /var/log/daemon.log, > for example: > > Sep 28 19:16:25 debian tftpd[3620]: tftpd: trying to get file: > C0A8016E.SUN4M Sep 28 19:16:25 debian tftpd[3620]: tftpd: serving file > from /srv/tftp For me it is 0A134205. I think this is adequately explained I've added a suggestion to check the log. > Also, 'boot net' or 'boot net-tpe' has always worked for me, is > mentioned syntax 'boot net my-sparc.image' is still used? 'boot net' works for me too. However, this para only suggests how to _force_ the image name, not what the regular command is. I have added this in the new text. What does 'boot net-tpe' different from 'boot net'? > 5.1.1: Drop information relevant for older OpenBoot revisions. > > 5.1.2: Ditto. Both done. > Also, in my experience booting from CD-ROM on sun4m
Re: Problems booting Sun Blade 100: still unable to boot from CD
On Saturday 30 December 2006 20:38, Jim Watson wrote: > My SunBlade 100 boots 2.6.18 OK from internal disk drive with > video=atyfb:off. (This was not required with 2.6.16) > As mentioned in the thread, net boot may be required - at least I > have not seen any reports of success with CDROM. Just to make sure... Note that it is at_y_fb:off, and not at_i_fb:off. That typo is quite natural to make and easy to overlook. pgp5iJNgQ8uJY.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Problems booting Sun Blade 100: still unable to boot from CD
On Saturday 30 December 2006 13:23, Holger Wansing wrote: > This doesn't help on Sun Blade 100 machines (while it does on > Blade 150 systems). > > Any suggestions on this? I have no idea what video cards are in a Sun Blade 100. If it is something other than an ATI card, you may need a different parameter. The kernel documentation could help. Pulling the video card or installing over serial console may help too. Of course, it could also be a completely separate issue. Note that installing from CD is known to be problematic in SunBlade systems. Netbooting works much more reliably. Sparc is a fringe architecture. That also means that people will often have to solve issues themselves, or at least do the work to narrow things down themselves. Cheers, FJP pgp4GAecsJIXN.pgp Description: PGP signature
[D-I] Last chance to update the Installation Guide for Etch
Hello porters, I've just announced the schedule [1] for the release of the Installation Guide to be included with the Etch release. That schedule leaves room for bigger updates until Dec 31 and for minor ones until Jan 7. This means that if you have any updates you'd like to get in for your port, there is not much time left. From Jan 1, please consult before directly committing any updates (or send patches). My apologies for not sending out a reminder earlier. Cheers, FJP [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2006/12/msg01492.html pgppHUqUps08r.pgp Description: PGP signature
Who is actively porting the Debian architectures?
(BCCed to d-ports) Hello, We received a BR that the list of porters for PowerPC on the Organization webpage [1] was outdated. However, this seems to be true for most ports. Please reply to debian-www@lists.debian.org with an updated list of active porters for your port after discussing changes on your port list. The current list is: Alpha -- member Ivan E. Moore III member Christopher C. Chimelis AMD64 -- member Frederik Schüler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> member Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ARM -- member Philip Blundell member Othmar Pasteka i386 -- member James Troup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> member Roman Hodek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> member Ryan Murray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> IA-64 -- member Bdale Garbee member Matthew Wilcox member Randolph Chung m68k -- member Roman Hodek member Christian T. Steigies member Michael Schmitz member Adam Conrad member Stephen R. Marenka member Wouter Verhelst MIPS -- member Ryan Murray member Guido Günther PA-RISC -- member Bdale Garbee member Matthew Wilcox member Randolph Chung PowerPC -- member Daniel Jacobowitz member Martin Schulze member Hartmut Koptein S/390 -- member Gerhard Tonn SPARC/UltraSPARC -- member Ben Collins member James Troup SuperH -- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I would suggest at least the following changes: Alpha: add Steve Langasek ARM: add Martin Michlmayr HPPA: add Kyle McMartin IA-64: add Dann Frazier MIPS: add Thiemo Seufer PowerPC: add Sven Luther and Bastian Blank Sparc: add Jurij Smakov S/390: add Bastian Blank Note: you may also wish to review and update the port pages under [2]. Cheers, FJP [1] http://www.debian.org/intro/organization [2] http://www.debian.org/ports/ pgp2R8NsJ4i87.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Bug#403364: SunBlade 150 problems - can anyone confirm?
On Saturday 16 December 2006 17:58, Jurij Smakov wrote: > Since you are the only person who reported such a problem so far, I > feel that severity is a bit too high, so I'm dropping it to > 'important' for now. I'm also CC'ing this message to the debian-sparc > mailing list to ask whether anybody else is seeing similar problems. There's something similar for a SunBlade 100 in installation report #402282 [1]. Cheers, FJP [1] http://bugs.debian.org/402282 pgpzpvj7TjgeH.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Can't upgrade to openssh-client and openssh-server 4.3p2-7
On Thursday 14 December 2006 19:47, Donatas Ciuksys wrote: > Trying to do "aptitude dist-upgrade" got this output (listed below). > Changing debian mirror server and clearing apt cache did not helped - > *.deb files in cache should be OK. Any ideas? This does not belong on the d-sparc list. Please file an bug report with severity "serious" against 'openssh' instead. Cheers, FJP pgp2Epb016mv6.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Messages on boot "couldn't get file descriptor referring to the console" & "INIT: Id 1 - 6 respawning too fast disable for 5 minutes"
On Monday 11 December 2006 05:28, John wrote: > Both these messages occur on my headless and keyboardless Ultra1 > (router) . Its connected through serial port A to Minicom running on an > old laptop. > > Q. How do I correct the boot process to stop this happening, please? Comment out the following lines in /etc/inittab: 1:2345:respawn:/sbin/getty 38400 tty1 2:23:respawn:/sbin/getty 38400 tty2 3:23:respawn:/sbin/getty 38400 tty3 4:23:respawn:/sbin/getty 38400 tty4 5:23:respawn:/sbin/getty 38400 tty5 6:23:respawn:/sbin/getty 38400 tty6 Cheers, FJP P.S. Next time, please don't put essential info for your question only in the Subject of the mail. The subject is too long and error messages in a subject are hard to read, especially if they are from multiple lines. pgpvMEXdDmH8u.pgp Description: PGP signature
