Re: Firebird on SPARC
Frans Pop escribió: On Saturday 03 March 2007 19:04, Martin Marques wrote: No, firefox = iceweasel; firebird = icedove (at least, AFAIK). FireFox = iceweasel, *thunderbird* = icedove -- select 'mmarques' || '@' || 'unl.edu.ar' AS email; - Martín Marqués | Programador, DBA Centro de Telemática| Administrador Universidad Nacional del Litoral - -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Firebird on SPARC
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. -- select 'mmarques' || '@' || 'unl.edu.ar' AS email; - Martín Marqués | Programador, DBA Centro de Telemática| Administrador Universidad Nacional del Litoral - -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: file problems
On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, Martin wrote: On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 09:44 -0300, Martin Marques wrote: Looks like a file corruption, but how can I force a file check on debian sparc. For some reason I can't get to the silo menu, and even if I do, how do I pass parameters to the kernel so it starts ro? Boot from an install/rescue CD and fsck the partition from there. It sounds like very serious disk unhappiness. It might be worth dd'ing a copy of the disk somewhere safe before you start so if it all goes wrong you can at least get back to square one. The problem is that this is a sarge instalation, and the sarge CD don't boot in rescue mode. :-( -- 21:50:04 up 2 days, 9:07, 0 users, load average: 0.92, 0.37, 0.18 - Lic. Martín Marqués | SELECT 'mmarques' || Centro de Telemática| '@' || 'unl.edu.ar'; Universidad Nacional| DBA, Programador, del Litoral | Administrador -
file problems
I got to work today and found that my debian sparc didn't respond (keyboard, X, etc. dead). I could get to it via ssh, but very strange things happend, like w, ps, top dying with exit 137 (they just printed the killed message). Then I rebooted and found that X didn't come up. Checking out, I found this: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/space/home/martin$ ls -l /usr/X11R6/lib/libGLU.so.1 ?x 1024 3758227200 536870912 117497918 Feb 21 1989 /usr/X11R6/lib/libGLU.so.1 This file I can't touch it at all (as root), not even change the file permissions. Looks like a file corruption, but how can I force a file check on debian sparc. For some reason I can't get to the silo menu, and even if I do, how do I pass parameters to the kernel so it starts ro? Any ideas? -- 21:50:04 up 2 days, 9:07, 0 users, load average: 0.92, 0.37, 0.18 - Lic. Martín Marqués | SELECT 'mmarques' || Centro de Telemática| '@' || 'unl.edu.ar'; Universidad Nacional| DBA, Programador, del Litoral | Administrador -
Re: Outstanding sparc issues for etch
I just pulled in #402745 cvs Terminated with fatal signal 10 I have CVS configured to work with ssh as an external autentication mecanism. I just passed cvs from stable (sarge) to testing and I'm getting this error. When I try to update a repository remotly I get this: $ cvs -q up ? SISTEMA.csv ? javascript/prueba.html ? javascript/windowCargo.js Terminated with fatal signal 10 On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 00:07:59 -0800, Jurij Smakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > With etch freezing announced today, I thought it would be a good time > to review the outstanding issues, and discuss the prospects of getting > them fixed for etch. I'm pretty happy to say that I currently don't > have any serious issues on my radar (and hope that it will remain that > way :-). Here is a list of bugs I'm currently tracking: > > 334104dmfe and tulip drivers advertise support for PCI cards with > the same PCI ID. Looks like it's intentional, see my message > in the bug trail. Even if it's not getting fixed, a workaround > (manual fix for the modules during install and blacklisting > the undesired module after the install) is available. > 388329xorg lacks support for PCI cards in the PCI domain other than > zero. Bug has a rather limited impact (only machines like > E250 are affected, I think). Patch is available, but I'm > fairly skeptical that it will get adopted at that point. In > the worst case I'll just build the unofficial xorg packages > with the patch and make them available from a private > repository. > 393894CD-ROM support (or esp driver, or something in the SCSI > subsystem) is broken on sparc32. Looks like a compiler issue, > see messages in the bug. Will most probably not get fixed, > so the alternative installation methods will have to be used. > 384653Partitioner misdetects the disk size during the install, > usually when the disk was previously configured for Solaris. > I was not able to reproduce it, people who did never provided > enough info to debug it. So it will remain unfixed. Luckily, > a simple workaround (zapping the first few kilobytes of the > disks with zeros before partitioning) is available. > 401524xorg hangs on Ultra1 with a cgsix card. Asked for some > debugging info, never received any. cgsix driver works fine > for me in SS20. > 384549Networking is not supported/broken on b100 blade systems. > We kind of figured out why the drivers fail, but I have no > idea how to fix it and upstream did not react in any way. > > If you know of any other bugs which require attention, or plan to work > on one of the bugs mentioned above, please post the information about > them in this thread. > > Best regards, > -- > Jurij Smakov [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Key: http://www.wooyd.org/pgpkey/ KeyID: C99E03CC > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact > [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- - Lic. Martín Marqués | SELECT 'mmarques' || Centro de Telemática| '@' || 'unl.edu.ar'; Universidad Nacional| DBA, Programador, del Litoral | Administrador - -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Xorg 7 I/O issues on sparc64
On Sun, 1 Oct 2006 11:40:43 +0200, Ludovic Courtès <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > I had reported some time ago problems running Xorg 7.0 on an Ultra 5 with > the ATI driver, including apparent file system corruption problems, > kernel crashes, etc. [0]. I tried out Xorg 7.1 with the 2.6.18-1 kernel > package recently and noticed that nothing had changed. However, I > finally decided to remove that SunPCi board that sitted in my U5 (and was > useless anyway, due to the lack of free drivers) and noticed that doing > so made Xorg start and work flawlessly! Is the SunPCI board the PCI Bridge? I have on of those in my U5 and last time I tried Xorg 7 it corrupted my disk, leaving me no other option but to reinstall. At the momento I'm working with XFree until I'm sure that xorg works ok (which doesn't seem to be the case). Here's my output from lspci: 00:00.0 Host bridge: Sun Microsystems Computer Corp. Ultra IIi 00:01.0 PCI bridge: Sun Microsystems Computer Corp. Simba Advanced PCI Bridge (rev 13) 00:01.1 PCI bridge: Sun Microsystems Computer Corp. Simba Advanced PCI Bridge (rev 13) 01:01.0 Bridge: Sun Microsystems Computer Corp. EBUS (rev 01) 01:01.1 Ethernet controller: Sun Microsystems Computer Corp. Happy Meal (rev 01) 01:02.0 VGA compatible controller: ATI Technologies Inc 3D Rage Pro 215GP (rev 5c) 01:03.0 IDE interface: Silicon Image, Inc. PCI0646 (rev 03) 02:03.0 SCSI storage controller: LSI Logic / Symbios Logic 53c875 (rev 04) The difference with you is that I am using the PCI bridge. -- - Lic. Martín Marqués | SELECT 'mmarques' || Centro de Telemática| '@' || 'unl.edu.ar'; Universidad Nacional| DBA, Programador, del Litoral | Administrador - -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Installing new kernel 2.6.17 on Ultra5
On Thu, 14 Sep 2006 23:53:50 -0700, Roman Shakin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > www.backports.com read it do it... also why exactly are you upgrading the > kernel ? 2.4 is alot more stable for sparc atleast... I have a ultra 5 and > I've had issues with 2.6 version kernels. backports have the 2.6 testing > kernel on them somewhere you will be able to upgrade it using aptitude or > apt How truthful are the statements of Roman related to kernel 2.4 vs. 2.6. I rekall reading that Linus Torvalds is working on SPARC the last years, so I would say that it should be working quite well. P.D.: I am with the latest 2.4 at the moment, but planning to junp to 2.6 soon. -- - Lic. Martín Marqués | SELECT 'mmarques' || Centro de Telemática| '@' || 'unl.edu.ar'; Universidad Nacional| DBA, Programador, del Litoral | Administrador - -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: xorg hardware detection - please test
On Thu, 6 Jul 2006 23:45:48 -0700 (PDT), Jurij Smakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > I've hacked together a script (attached) which parses prtconf output and > outputs the name of corresponding xorg driver. I've only included the > information which I could find on my own machines and prtconf examples. > Please test it on your box (you'll need prtconf from sparc-utils and awk). > If you will get no output (which means that the script failed to detect > any cards) or 'unknown' (found a card, but failed to map it to the > driver), please submit output of prtconf -p -v on your machine as well as > information about which xorg driver is appropriate for it. > > I would also appreciate information about which keyboard settings are > appropriate for what keyboart types, so that we can implement it properly. bugs:~# ./video_detect ati bugs:~# uname -a Linux bugs 2.4.27-3-sparc64 #1 Fri Jun 2 07:35:41 UTC 2006 sparc64 GNU/Linux bugs:~# lspci 00:00.0 Host bridge: Sun Microsystems Computer Corp. Ultra IIi 00:01.0 PCI bridge: Sun Microsystems Computer Corp. Simba Advanced PCI Bridge (rev 13) 00:01.1 PCI bridge: Sun Microsystems Computer Corp. Simba Advanced PCI Bridge (rev 13) 01:01.0 Bridge: Sun Microsystems Computer Corp. EBUS (rev 01) 01:01.1 Ethernet controller: Sun Microsystems Computer Corp. Happy Meal (rev 01) 01:02.0 VGA compatible controller: ATI Technologies Inc 3D Rage Pro 215GP (rev 5c) 01:03.0 IDE interface: Silicon Image, Inc. PCI0646 (rev 03) 02:03.0 SCSI storage controller: LSI Logic / Symbios Logic 53c875 (rev 04) -- - Lic. Martín Marqués | SELECT 'mmarques' || Centro de Telemática| '@' || 'unl.edu.ar'; Universidad Nacional| DBA, Programador, del Litoral | Administrador - -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Xorg 7 on sparc64
On Wed, 21 Jun 2006 18:42:46 +0200, Ludovic Courtès <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I think we have >> verified that the file has the correct md5sum before, so it's not >> corrupt... > > Actually, it _looks_ corrupt after X crashed. But upon reboot + fsck (+ > additional reboot if `fsck' feels like it), the file is correct. I have just finish reinstalling my U5 after an X crash that erased my parition table. Be carefull, looks like there's a big BUG in the xorg. -- - Lic. Martín Marqués | SELECT 'mmarques' || Centro de Telemática| '@' || 'unl.edu.ar'; Universidad Nacional| DBA, Programador, del Litoral | Administrador - -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Xorg 7 on sparc64
On Sat, 17 Jun 2006, Jurij Smakov wrote: Just to reconfirm: I've just reinstalled my Ultra5, updated it to the latest sid and installed xorg. The xorg.conf file it generates during installation is indeed broken, as it uses fbdev driver. The machine hangs solid when an attempt is made to do startx with this xorg.conf (bad!). Changing the driver to ati makes everything work nicely though. Versions of installed packages: xorg7.0.22 xserver-xorg-core 1.0.2-8 xserver-xorg-video-ati 6.5.8.0-1 The actual xorg.conf used and the log of the server starting up are available at http://www.wooyd.org/debian/xorg/xorg.conf-ultra5-ati http://www.wooyd.org/debian/xorg/xorg.log-ultra5-ati OK, I'm having some trouble with Xorg. I followed the procedure, installed the exact versions mentioned above, and X doesn't start. Now, first of all I found that there is no x_accel module, so I added the line Option "no_accel" "true". That remove this error: (WW) INVALID IO ALLOCATION b: 0x2c00400 e: 0x2c004ff correcting^G (EE) /usr/lib/xorg/modules/libxaa.so is an unrecognized module type (EE) ATI: Failed to load module "xaa" (unknown module type, 6) But after that I got this error: (EE) /usr/lib/xorg/modules/libshadowfb.so is an unrecognized module type (EE) ATI: Failed to load module "shadowfb" (unknown module type, 6) The problem is that I can't set the frambuffer to off. My Console works with frame buffer, and I have been unlucky setting FB off in silo.conf: image=/boot/vmlinuz-2.6.17-rc3-sparc64 label=linux2.6.17 root=/dev/hda1 initrd=/boot/initrd.img-2.6.17-rc3-sparc64 append="video=sbusfb:off" read-only The full output from X is: X Window System Version 7.0.0 Release Date: 21 December 2005 X Protocol Version 11, Revision 0, Release 7.0 Build Operating System:Linux 2.6.17-rc1 sparc Current Operating System: Linux bugs 2.6.17-rc3-sparc64 #2 Mon May 22 11:15:31 UTC 2006 sparc64 Build Date: 16 March 2006 Before reporting problems, check http://wiki.x.org to make sure that you have the latest version. Module Loader present Markers: (--) probed, (**) from config file, (==) default setting, (++) from command line, (!!) notice, (II) informational, (WW) warning, (EE) error, (NI) not implemented, (??) unknown. (==) Log file: "/var/log/Xorg.0.log", Time: Tue Jun 20 11:08:06 2006 (==) Using config file: "/etc/X11/xorg.conf" (EE) end of block range 0xcb < begin 0x2c8 (EE) end of block range 0xc0001b < begin 0x2c00018 (EE) end of block range 0xcb < begin 0x2c8 (EE) end of block range 0xc0001b < begin 0x2c00018 (WW) INVALID IO ALLOCATION b: 0x2c00400 e: 0x2c004ff correcting^G (EE) /usr/lib/xorg/modules/libshadowfb.so is an unrecognized module type (EE) ATI: Failed to load module "shadowfb" (unknown module type, 6) (EE) Screen(s) found, but none have a usable configuration. Fatal server error: no screens found -- 21:50:04 up 2 days, 9:07, 0 users, load average: 0.92, 0.37, 0.18 - Lic. Martín Marqués | SELECT 'mmarques' || Centro de Telemática| '@' || 'unl.edu.ar'; Universidad Nacional| DBA, Programador, del Litoral | Administrador -
Re: Xorg 7 on sparc64
On Sun, 18 Jun 2006, Steve Pacenka wrote: On Saturday 17 June 2006 18:37, Martin Marques wrote: On Sat, 17 Jun 2006 22:56:46 +0200, Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: There is also: Bug#368214: Wrong keyboard configured for Sparc with 2.6 kernels And of course the recent: Bug#373821: Unavailable xserver-xorg-video-sun* necessary for many Sparc Which SPARC need these packages? Any Sparc32 (sunbw2, suntcx, suncg14, suncg3, suncg6) except Javastation, Sparc64 with Creator or Elite framebuffers (sunffb). Wasn't it that SPARC32 wasn't going to have any more support in new Debian etch? I didn't follow the thread to the end, but I remember the discussion. -- 21:50:04 up 2 days, 9:07, 0 users, load average: 0.92, 0.37, 0.18 - Lic. Martín Marqués | SELECT 'mmarques' || Centro de Telemática| '@' || 'unl.edu.ar'; Universidad Nacional| DBA, Programador, del Litoral | Administrador -
Re: sparc etch status (was: Re: Xorg 7 on sparc64)
On Sat, 17 Jun 2006 22:24:42 -0700 (PDT), Jurij Smakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 17 Jun 2006, Martin Marques wrote: > >> Talking of that... is Debian/SPARC gonna make it to etch? I can't run >> KDE apps without having a hang once in a while (especially kmail (which >> I don't use anymore) and konqueror). swf is also boken in the latest >> testing. rapidsvn can't do diffs, but this could be a general problem >> inglobbing all platforms, and not something particular to SPARC. > > It would be great if you could investigate what causes these problems and > file bugs, if they are not already filed. Extra points if you can fix > them, if it's sparc-specific, in 90% of cases it's some kind of unaligned > access issue. I did file a bug report on the KDE issue (about 6 months ago). -- - Lic. Martín Marqués | SELECT 'mmarques' || Centro de Telemática| '@' || 'unl.edu.ar'; Universidad Nacional| DBA, Programador, del Litoral | Administrador - -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Xorg 7 on sparc64
One more thing related with this issue. When I try to install xserver-xorg-video-ati it wants to remove kcontrol, kdesktop, konq-plugins, konqueror, etc. Is this OK (I don't think so). Maybe it has to do with the fact that KDE is being updated the last few days. Anyway, monday in national holiday here in Argentina, so on tuesday things may change. :-D bugs:~# apt-get install xserver-xorg-video-ati xserver-xorg-input-mouse xserver-xorg-input-kbd Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree... Done The following extra packages will be installed: libglu1-mesa libxfont1 x11-common xbase-clients xfonts-100dpi xfonts-75dpi xfonts-base xfonts-encodings xfonts-utils xkb-data xlibmesa-glu xserver-xfree86 xserver-xorg xserver-xorg-core xserver-xorg-input-all xserver-xorg-input-evdev xserver-xorg-input-synaptics xserver-xorg-input-wacom Suggested packages: mesa-utils mdetect read-edid libglide2 gsynaptics ksynaptics qsynaptics Recommended packages: laptop-detect xresprobe discover1 xkeyboard-config The following packages will be REMOVED: kcontrol kdesktop konq-plugins konqueror libdps1 libgle3 libwxgtk2.4-1 libwxgtk2.6-0 libxft1 python-wxgtk2.4 xfree86-common xfs xscreensaver-gl xserver-common xutils The following NEW packages will be installed: libglu1-mesa libxfont1 xfonts-encodings xfonts-utils xkb-data xserver-xorg xserver-xorg-core xserver-xorg-input-all xserver-xorg-input-evdev xserver-xorg-input-kbd xserver-xorg-input-mouse xserver-xorg-input-synaptics xserver-xorg-input-wacom xserver-xorg-video-ati The following packages will be upgraded: x11-common xbase-clients xfonts-100dpi xfonts-75dpi xfonts-base xlibmesa-glu xserver-xfree86 7 upgraded, 14 newly installed, 15 to remove and 9 not upgraded. On Sat, 17 Jun 2006 13:46:19 -0700 (PDT), Jurij Smakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 17 Jun 2006, Ludovic Court�s wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> 2 days, 15 hours, 43 minutes, 47 seconds ago, >> Martin Marques wrote: >>> A couple of months ago I tried upgrading my XFree86 to Xorg On my U5 > with that ATI video card. The result is that the whole workstation > freezes, and I have to turn it off (reset boton doesn't work in this > case). What I'm sure is that it wasn't Xorg 7.0 (6 something). >> >> I used to use Xorg 6.9 from `unstable' on my U5 and it ran flawlessly. >> This is weird since Xorg 7.0 is described as no more than 6.9 + the >> GNU build framework [0]. > > Just to reconfirm: I've just reinstalled my Ultra5, updated it to the > latest sid and installed xorg. The xorg.conf file it generates during > installation is indeed broken, as it uses fbdev driver. The machine hangs > solid when an attempt is made to do startx with this xorg.conf (bad!). > Changing the driver to ati makes everything work nicely though. Versions > of installed packages: > > xorg 7.0.22 > xserver-xorg-core 1.0.2-8 > xserver-xorg-video-ati6.5.8.0-1 > > The actual xorg.conf used and the log of the server starting up are > available at > > http://www.wooyd.org/debian/xorg/xorg.conf-ultra5-ati > http://www.wooyd.org/debian/xorg/xorg.log-ultra5-ati > > Best regards, > > Jurij Smakov[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Key: http://www.wooyd.org/pgpkey/ KeyID: C99E03CC > -- - Lic. Martín Marqués | SELECT 'mmarques' || Centro de Telemática| '@' || 'unl.edu.ar'; Universidad Nacional| DBA, Programador, del Litoral | Administrador - -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Xorg 7 on sparc64
On Sat, 17 Jun 2006 22:56:46 +0200, Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There is also: > Bug#368214: Wrong keyboard configured for Sparc with 2.6 kernels > And of course the recent: > Bug#373821: Unavailable xserver-xorg-video-sun* necessary for many Sparc Which SPARC need these packages? > installing and working properly on Sparc in time for Etch... Talking of that... is Debian/SPARC gonna make it to etch? I can't run KDE apps without having a hang once in a while (especially kmail (which I don't use anymore) and konqueror). swf is also boken in the latest testing. rapidsvn can't do diffs, but this could be a general problem inglobbing all platforms, and not something particular to SPARC. -- - Lic. Martín Marqués | SELECT 'mmarques' || Centro de Telemática| '@' || 'unl.edu.ar'; Universidad Nacional| DBA, Programador, del Litoral | Administrador - -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Xorg 7 on sparc64
On Sat, 17 Jun 2006 13:46:19 -0700 (PDT), Jurij Smakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 17 Jun 2006, Ludovic Court�s wrote: > >> I used to use Xorg 6.9 from `unstable' on my U5 and it ran flawlessly. >> This is weird since Xorg 7.0 is described as no more than 6.9 + the >> GNU build framework [0]. > > Just to reconfirm: I've just reinstalled my Ultra5, updated it to the > latest sid and installed xorg. The xorg.conf file it generates during > installation is indeed broken, as it uses fbdev driver. The machine hangs > solid when an attempt is made to do startx with this xorg.conf (bad!). > Changing the driver to ati makes everything work nicely though. Versions > of installed packages: > > xorg 7.0.22 > xserver-xorg-core 1.0.2-8 > xserver-xorg-video-ati6.5.8.0-1 My xorg.conf file had this: Section "Device" Identifier "ATI Technologies, Inc. 3D Rage Pro 215GP" Driver "ati" BusID "PCI:1:2:0" Option "UseFBDev" "true" EndSection So I guess (looking at your xorg.conf) that all I have to do is comment the Option of UseFBDev. Excelent! -- - Lic. Martín Marqués | SELECT 'mmarques' || Centro de Telemática| '@' || 'unl.edu.ar'; Universidad Nacional| DBA, Programador, del Litoral | Administrador - -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Xorg 7 on sparc64
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 20:38:49 +0200, Ludovic Courtès <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > (About broken Xorg 7.0 on an Ultra 5.) > > Has anybody else tried Xorg 7.0 on an Ultra 5 (or similar) with an ATI > 3D Rage Pro? Or am I the only one experiencing problems? The wiki > page [0] currently only shows Jurij's success with an ATI board and a > failure with a Raptor board. A couple of months ago I tried upgrading my XFree86 to Xorg On my U5 with that ATI video card. The result is that the whole workstation freezes, and I have to turn it off (reset boton doesn't work in this case). What I'm sure is that it wasn't Xorg 7.0 (6 something). What I did then was downgrade to XFree86 from stable and leave it there. I may try again to upgrade this wekend. -- - Lic. Martín Marqués | SELECT 'mmarques' || Centro de Telemática| '@' || 'unl.edu.ar'; Universidad Nacional| DBA, Programador, del Litoral | Administrador - -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Possible fix for firefox's bus error
On Sun, 21 May 2006 14:20:19 +1000, jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, May 20, 2006 at 08:52:18PM -0700, Jurij Smakov wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I've came up with a works-for-me patch for firefox, which fixes bus > errors >> on startup (bug #362170). The patch and the binary debs built with it > are >> available from: >> >> http://www.wooyd.org/debian/firefox/ >> >> If you can test it, please do. If it works, I'll push the patch > upstream. > > it [0] starts up and runs OK on my sunblade 100 [1], thanks Here on a SUN Ultra5 works great[1] [1]: Linux bugs 2.6.16-1-sparc64 #2 Fri Apr 21 09:55:12 PDT 2006 sparc64 GNU/Linux Just one thing. Shouldn't you had changed the version so there's no conflict with the testing package? They both have the same version as of today. P.D.: When will the patch make it to unstable? -- - Lic. Martín Marqués | SELECT 'mmarques' || Centro de Telemática| '@' || 'unl.edu.ar'; Universidad Nacional| DBA, Programador, del Litoral | Administrador - -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: Bus error with new version of firefox
On Sun, 23 Apr 2006 21:00:58 +0200, "James Plant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm pretty sure the last working version is > firefox_1.5.dfsg-3_sparc.deb or > firefox_1.5.dfsg-4_sparc.deb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ apt-cache policy firefox firefox: Installed: (none) Candidate: 1.5.dfsg+1.5.0.1-4 Version table: 1.5.dfsg+1.5.0.1-4 0 800 http://ftp.de.debian.org testing/main Packages 50 http://ftp.de.debian.org unstable/main Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status I got Bus errors with that version (I think with JavaScript, but not sure), so I went back to the mozilla-firefox from sarge (stable). -- - Lic. Martín Marqués | SELECT 'mmarques' || Centro de Telemática| '@' || 'unl.edu.ar'; Universidad Nacional| DBA, Programador, del Litoral | Administrador - -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bus error with new version of firefox
On Fri, 7 Apr 2006 15:23:23 +0200, Admar Schoonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > You can try to get an old version at http://snapshot.debian.net. I don't > know > which version of firefox does not crash though. I downgrading right now to stable. -- - Lic. Martín Marqués | SELECT 'mmarques' || Centro de Telemática| '@' || 'unl.edu.ar'; Universidad Nacional| DBA, Programador, del Litoral | Administrador - -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bus error with new version of firefox
On Fri, 7 Apr 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 10:33:48AM +0200, Admar Schoonen wrote: I have exactly the same problem on my blade 100. It's running a fairly current sid with custom kernel 2.6.9. It's not only a problem for firefox though, since it occurs with galeon too. Epiphany 1.8.3-4 and mozilla-browser 2:1.7.12-1.1 work fine. Bug 354725 describes the problem. As far as I know, no fix is known yet. Thanks Admar, It's a sad situation :( With the previous version of firefox I haven't the problem. But I'm not able to find that release. and I've cleaned /var/cache/apt/archives If anyone can help, I thank in advance ;) To add to the oddities of this, it chashes on the default page which is http://www.mozilla.com/firefox/updated. Also I see broken dependencies, like trying to install mozilla-firefox says it needs version 1.5.dfsg+1.5.0.1-3 of firefox (which is available in i386). So, AFAIK, the problem is that firefox is not correctly updated for SPARC. This is a real problem for me. I also have to deal with not been able to start the 2.6.x kernel for SPARC due to some problem with udev, which gives a kernel panic in the boot. SWF is another aplication which gives problems on SPARC (I had to downgrade to stable as the testing version hanged my firefox). Also KDE is totally broken in SPARC testing. Apps start, but crashes for some unknown reason. Thsi happens with apps that go from kmail or konqueror to klipper and knotes. I hope we can get these issues solve quickly. -- 21:50:04 up 2 days, 9:07, 0 users, load average: 0.92, 0.37, 0.18 - Lic. Martín Marqués | SELECT 'mmarques' || Centro de Telemática| '@' || 'unl.edu.ar'; Universidad Nacional| DBA, Programador, del Litoral | Administrador -
Re: version of openoffice packages in testing/unstable
On Mon, 20 Mar 2006, Dr. Zimmermann wrote: Hi all, does anyone know what anticipates the compilation of newer openoffice packages ? The SPARC version stays at 2.0.0-5 while i386 and PPC versions have been updated to 2.0.1-5 several weeks ago in testing and recently to 2.0.2-1 in unstable. I have meandered through several CVS and Bugreport pages without finding any hint. Not only that. The SPARC version of OpenOffice isn't even installable now: bugs:~# apt-get install openoffice.org-core Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree... Done Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable distribution that some required packages have not yet been created or been moved out of Incoming. Since you only requested a single operation it is extremely likely that the package is simply not installable and a bug report against that package should be filed. The following information may help to resolve the situation: The following packages have unmet dependencies: openoffice.org-core: Depends: openoffice.org-common (> 2.0.0) but it is not going to be installed Depends: openoffice.org-l10n-en-us (> 2.0.0) but it is not going to be installed or openoffice.org-l10n-2.0.0 but it is not installable E: Broken packages -- 21:50:04 up 2 days, 9:07, 0 users, load average: 0.92, 0.37, 0.18 - Lic. Martín Marqués | SELECT 'mmarques' || Centro de Telemática| '@' || 'unl.edu.ar'; Universidad Nacional| DBA, Programador, del Litoral | Administrador -
udev not working
I reinstalled an U5 some time ago, and I haven't been able to get kernel 2.6 working. Aparently it's all due to a udev problem. When I boot I get errors like: udevd-event: run_program: exec of program `/lib/udev/udev_run_hotplug` failed I get tons of those lines with other udev libs, and after that, a kernel panic. Udev is 0.085-1 and kernel is 2.6.15-1 (2.6.15-8). Any ideas on what could be happening? -- 21:50:04 up 2 days, 9:07, 0 users, load average: 0.92, 0.37, 0.18 - Lic. Martín Marqués | SELECT 'mmarques' || Centro de Telemática| '@' || 'unl.edu.ar'; Universidad Nacional| DBA, Programador, del Litoral | Administrador -
Re: Testers wanted for kernel/discover1
On Thu, 31 Mar 2005, Jurij Smakov wrote: On Sat, 26 Mar 2005, [iso-8859-1] Martín Marqués wrote: Where do we report them? I just found out that my IDE cdrom doesn't work. Generally, as a bug against corresponding kernel-image package, for example kernel-image-2.4.27-sparc. However, if you have an ALI IDE controller, such as the one in SB100, this bug is already known. I'm not sure it has to do with the IDE controller, as my IDE disk works OK. Only have problems with the cdrom. Anyway, I don't have that controller: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ lspci :00:00.0 Host bridge: Sun Microsystems Computer Corp. Ultra IIi :00:01.0 PCI bridge: Sun Microsystems Computer Corp. Simba Advanced PCI Bridge (rev 13) :00:01.1 PCI bridge: Sun Microsystems Computer Corp. Simba Advanced PCI Bridge (rev 13) :01:01.0 Bridge: Sun Microsystems Computer Corp. EBUS (rev 01) :01:01.1 Ethernet controller: Sun Microsystems Computer Corp. Happy Meal (rev 01) :01:02.0 VGA compatible controller: ATI Technologies Inc 3D Rage Pro 215GP (rev 5c) :01:03.0 IDE interface: Silicon Image, Inc. (formerly CMD Technology Inc) PCI0646 (rev 03) :02:03.0 SCSI storage controller: LSI Logic / Symbios Logic 53c875 (rev 04) -- 11:55:01 up 155 days, 1:49, 3 users, load average: 0.12, 0.72, 0.86 - Martín Marqués| select 'mmarques' || '@' || 'unl.edu.ar' Centro de Telematica | DBA, Programador, Administrador Universidad Nacional del Litoral -
dist-upgrade on testing gives errors on konqueror
Just upgraded my testing workstation, and found that KDE went to version 3.2.x, but left back some very important KDE apps like kmail and konqueror. bugs:~# dpkg -l kmail konqueror ||/ NameVersion Description +++-===-===-== ii kmail 3.1.5-1 KDE Email client ii konqueror 3.1.5-2 KDE's advanced File Manager, Web Browser and Document Viewer Now, when even I want no browse with konqueror I get this error: /usr/lib/libkwalletclient.so.1: undefined symbol: _ZN9DCOPReply9typeCheckEPKcb Any ideas on why konqueror wasn't pushed up to version 3.2.x with the rest of KDE? -- 09:42:02 up 49 days, 14:06, 3 users, load average: 2.44, 2.23, 1.82 - Martín Marqués| select 'mmarques' || '@' || 'unl.edu.ar' Centro de Telematica | DBA, Programador, Administrador Universidad Nacional del Litoral -
Cron not working
I'm having some serious problems with cron jobs. Aparently, they just aren't working correctly. There are lots of scripts in /etc/cron.daily/ that don't get executed by crond, but latter in the day get executed by anacron. Now, why could this be like that? I searched the logs, just to find nothing, neither in the configuration files of /etc/crontab and /etc/anacrontab. Can someone give me a hint? P.D.: Cron is working. My personal cron jobs get executed right on time. -- 07:41:01 up 49 days, 12:05, 2 users, load average: 1.58, 1.27, 0.82 - Martín Marqués| select 'mmarques' || '@' || 'unl.edu.ar' Centro de Telematica | DBA, Programador, Administrador Universidad Nacional del Litoral -
Re: ultra 10 started booting read only? corruption? rebuild?
El Jue 08 Abr 2004 02:59, Patrick Finnegan escribió: > Justin A declared on Thursday 08 April 2004 12:02 am: > > On Thu, 2004-04-08 at 00:40, asera fini wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > My ultra 10 started booting read only, > > > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-sparc/2004/debian-sparc-200403/msg00297 > >.html > > > > :-) > > > > -- > > -Justin > > And my fix... > http://lists.debian.org/debian-sparc/2004/debian-sparc-200403/msg00323.html Sorry, just had this problem on friday and just saw this message. Why is this happening? Any bug report submitted? -- 19:25:01 up 33 days, 23:52, 2 users, load average: 0.19, 0.24, 0.23 - Martín Marqués| select 'mmarques' || '@' || 'unl.edu.ar' Centro de Telematica | DBA, Programador, Administrador Universidad Nacional del Litoral -
stable/testing/unstable
Is it posible to know the state of a package using apt? I would like to know which packages on my system are from unstable, which from testing and which from stable. Is it posible? -- 10:19:01 up 9 days, 14:50, 4 users, load average: 0.00, 0.08, 0.14 - Martín Marqués| select 'mmarques' || '@' || 'unl.edu.ar' Centro de Telematica | DBA, Programador, Administrador Universidad Nacional del Litoral -
new updates
In the last week I haven't had 1 update of my Debian testing, which normally had at least one update a day. The funny thing is that not even the unstable packages seem to be changing when I do an apt-get update. Any ideas on why it happens? Itried with the Chile mirror, and now with the German mirror. -- 18:39:01 up 2 days, 1:03, 1 user, load average: 0.81, 1.03, 0.99 - Martín Marqués| select 'mmarques' || '@' || 'unl.edu.ar' Centro de Telematica | DBA, Programador, Administrador Universidad Nacional del Litoral -
Re: 64bits & df
El Mar 18 Nov 2003 01:58, Peter Eisentraut escribió: > Ben Collins writes: > > I would suggest something close to ditching calling ld directly, so that > > the CC env can make things work smoothly. > > We need ld to do partial linking: > > ld -r -o SUBSYS.o foo1.o foo2.o ... > > We get the right ld to use with > > gcc -print-prog-name=ld > > but that does not pick up the right flags. I'm open for better ideas. I got it to compile and link using what Tom Callaway suggested: export LDEMULATION=elf64_sparc with the aditional export CC="gcc -m64" Now I have trouble running initdb. Don't know if it has something to do with my semvmax configuration (using the kernel from the distro), or with the 64 bit linkage. -- 08:41:01 up 27 days, 16:03, 2 users, load average: 0.61, 0.56, 0.44 - Martín Marqués| select 'mmarques' || '@' || 'unl.edu.ar' Centro de Telematica | DBA, Programador, Administrador Universidad Nacional del Litoral -
32 vs. 64
With all this 64bits discussion of the last day, I was thinking... the debs that come with Debian SPARC, surelly are compiled with 32 bit support, right? Isn't there plans on having more 64 bits support in the linux SPARC distribution. I mean, I'm right now compiling, with some problems, PostgreSQL-7.4RC2, and I think it's going out with 64 bit support. Now, on some application, I find 64 to be little important, but on my database server it may be crucial to have it (if the arch supports it). -- 09:02:01 up 23 days, 16:24, 4 users, load average: 1.27, 2.02, 2.44 - Martín Marqués| select 'mmarques' || '@' || 'unl.edu.ar' Centro de Telematica | DBA, Programador, Administrador Universidad Nacional del Litoral -
Re: 64bits & df
El Jue 13 Nov 2003 17:35, Ben Collins escribió: > > /usr/bin/ld -r -o SUBSYS.o heaptuple.o indextuple.o indexvalid.o > > printtup.o scankey.o tupdesc.o > > /usr/bin/ld: No tiene soporte el enlazado reubicable con reubicaciones > > del formato elf64-sparc (heaptuple.o) al formato elf32-sparc (SUBSYS.o) > > make[4]: *** [SUBSYS.o] Error 1 > > *sigh* > > Just add "-m elf64_sparc" to this command line. Maybe there's someway > you can set in the env. Try setting what var is "/usr/bin/ld" to > "/usr/bin/ld -m elf64_sparc". That solved it Now how could I get that inside the /usr/bin/ld, unless I alias it? Maybe it should be in the configure or the makefiles. P.D.: I'm send a copy to Peter Eisentraut, who is a PostgreSQL core developer, and a Linux SPARC user. -- 18:26:02 up 23 days, 1:48, 4 users, load average: 2.03, 1.62, 1.45 - Martín Marqués| select 'mmarques' || '@' || 'unl.edu.ar' Centro de Telematica | DBA, Programador, Administrador Universidad Nacional del Litoral -
perl upgrade problem
I upgraded gaim to unstable to have MSN support, and with it came a new version of perl (gaim depends on perl?). Any way, the new perl screwed up my amavisd-new which was spitting out lots of messages about not finding utf8.pm, which was installed. The problem is that it had the old paths in @INC and was pointing to no where. I got a fix on amavisd-new making a symlink, but I would like to know how to make it work correctly, and not expect another problem with some other perl dependent aplication. -- 17:55:01 up 23 days, 1:17, 4 users, load average: 1.60, 1.31, 1.23 - Martín Marqués| select 'mmarques' || '@' || 'unl.edu.ar' Centro de Telematica | DBA, Programador, Administrador Universidad Nacional del Litoral -
Re: 64bits & df
El Jue 13 Nov 2003 11:08, escribió: > On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 11:15:49AM -0300, Martin Marques wrote: > > Sorry if this has nothing to do with the thread, but a few weeks ago I > > sent a mail with inconviniences in compiling PostgreSQL with 64bit > > support. In the PostgreSQL list, the person that had tested PG in Linux > > SPARC (Debian) said it couldn't be compiled with 64 bit support (even > > when configure found 64 bit support in the system). > > Is there a straight forward way to get full (or almost full) 64 bit > > support in Linux on SPARC? Does it have to do with GCC or glibc? > > Setting CC="gcc -m64" doesn't do it? No success at all: make -C access all make[3]: Entering directory `/space/home/martin/basura/postgresql-7.4RC2/src/ backend/access' make -C common SUBSYS.o make[4]: Entering directory `/space/home/martin/basura/postgresql-7.4RC2/src/ backend/access/common' gcc -m64 -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-declarations -I../../../../src/include -D_GNU_SOURCE -c -o heaptuple.o heaptuple.c gcc -m64 -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-declarations -I../../../../src/include -D_GNU_SOURCE -c -o indextuple.o indextuple.c gcc -m64 -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-declarations -I../../../../src/include -D_GNU_SOURCE -c -o indexvalid.o indexvalid.c gcc -m64 -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-declarations -I../../../../src/include -D_GNU_SOURCE -c -o printtup.o printtup.c gcc -m64 -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-declarations -I../../../../src/include -D_GNU_SOURCE -c -o scankey.o scankey.c gcc -m64 -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-declarations -I../../../../src/include -D_GNU_SOURCE -c -o tupdesc.o tupdesc.c /usr/bin/ld -r -o SUBSYS.o heaptuple.o indextuple.o indexvalid.o printtup.o scankey.o tupdesc.o /usr/bin/ld: No tiene soporte el enlazado reubicable con reubicaciones del formato elf64-sparc (heaptuple.o) al formato elf32-sparc (SUBSYS.o) make[4]: *** [SUBSYS.o] Error 1 -- 17:26:02 up 23 days, 48 min, 4 users, load average: 1.72, 1.70, 1.45 - Martín Marqués| select 'mmarques' || '@' || 'unl.edu.ar' Centro de Telematica | DBA, Programador, Administrador Universidad Nacional del Litoral -
Re: 64bits & df
El Jue 13 Nov 2003 09:46, Ben Collins escribió: > > When I run this testcase by hand, wait, that's the problem likely. > > It uses "gcc-3.3" as CC which doesn't have all of the "uname -m" output logic > > the /usr/bin/gcc script written by Ben has. If the configure test above > > is run without an explicit "-m64" it will create a 32-bit shared object > > for the test case. On sparc32 the test does pass properly, on sparc64 > > it does not. > > That makes the most sense. I'll get this fixed today. Thanks for looking > into it Dave. Sorry if this has nothing to do with the thread, but a few weeks ago I sent a mail with inconviniences in compiling PostgreSQL with 64bit support. In the PostgreSQL list, the person that had tested PG in Linux SPARC (Debian) said it couldn't be compiled with 64 bit support (even when configure found 64 bit support in the system). Is there a straight forward way to get full (or almost full) 64 bit support in Linux on SPARC? Does it have to do with GCC or glibc? Here is the link to the mail I sent (it has the output from make): http://lists.debian.org/debian-sparc/2003/debian-sparc-200311/msg00031.html -- select 'mmarques' || '@' || 'unl.edu.ar' AS email; - Martín Marqués |[EMAIL PROTECTED] Programador, Administrador, DBA | Centro de Telemática Universidad Nacional del Litoral -
Fwd: Re: [GENERAL] PostgreSQL v7.4 Release Candidate 1 compile errors
Just got this as a reply from the PGSQL list, and I'm very interested in the 64 bit capacity of Linux on my U5 SPARC. Is it posible to have a real 64 bit compiler, and with that have aplications like PG with 64 bit support? -- Mensaje reenviado -- Subject: Re: [GENERAL] PostgreSQL v7.4 Release Candidate 1 compile errors Date: Jue 06 Nov 2003 06:01 From: Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Martin Marques Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org Martin Marques writes: > I tried compuiling RC1 and got this on make: > > make[4]: Entering directory > `/space/home/martin/basura/postgresql-7.4RC1/src/backend/access/common' > /usr/bin/ld -r -o SUBSYS.o heaptuple.o indextuple.o indexvalid.o printtup.o > scankey.o tupdesc.o > /usr/bin/ld: Relocatable linking with relocations from format elf64-sparc > (heaptuple.o) to format elf32-sparc (SUBSYS.o) is not supported > make[4]: *** [SUBSYS.o] Error 1 > > Looks like I'm missing something in my instalation, but couldn't find out > what it was. Any ideas those of you working on 64 bit? That's the same result I had. The machine doesn't have a 64-bit userland and compiler tools. You need to run sparc32 ./configure sparc32 make sparc32 make all At least on Debian. I don't think we're in a position to support 64-bit Sparcs on Linux at this point. -- Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- -- 08:17:01 up 15 days, 15:39, 5 users, load average: 0.14, 0.27, 0.25 - Martín Marqués| select 'mmarques' || '@' || 'unl.edu.ar' Centro de Telematica | DBA, Programador, Administrador Universidad Nacional del Litoral -
Error with firebird
I'm having this problem with mozilla-firebird since I upgraded to 0.6. When I try to execute de binary (not the mozilla-firebird script) I get this: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/home/martin$ /usr/lib/mozilla-firebird/MozillaFirebird-bin /usr/lib/mozilla-firebird/MozillaFirebird-bin: relocation error: /usr/lib/ mozilla-firebird/MozillaFirebird-bin: undefined symbol: _ZTV14nsGetInterface Any ideas? -- 10:55:01 up 18 days, 20:27, 5 users, load average: 0.22, 0.32, 0.41 - Martín Marqués |[EMAIL PROTECTED] Programador, Administrador, DBA | Centro de Telematica Universidad Nacional del Litoral -
Re: Mozilla's back
El Mar 07 Oct 2003 04:18, Antonello escribió: > On Mon, 6 Oct 2003 23:15:36 -0700 > > "David S. Miller" wrote: > > On Tue, 7 Oct 2003 06:31:39 +0200 > > > > Elie De Brauwer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > After a long time mozilla is back up and running in unstable :-) > > Dunno if this applies to you, but coreutils new upstream release is > broken on Sid/SPARC and, if I don't put the package on hold I can't > apt-get anymore. They didn't fic Mozilla Firebird, which is still broken in testing: bugs:~# apt-cache showpkg mozilla-firebird Package: mozilla-firebird Versions: 0.6.1-7(/var/lib/apt/lists/mirrors.kernel.org_debian_dists_testing_main_binary-sparc_Packages)(/var/lib/apt/lists/mirrors.kernel.org_debian_dists_unstable_main_binary-sparc_Packages)(/var/lib/dpkg/status) -- 08:21:01 up 4 days, 17:58, 2 users, load average: 1.26, 0.68, 0.49 - Martín Marqués |[EMAIL PROTECTED] Programador, Administrador, DBA | Centro de Telematica Universidad Nacional del Litoral -
Re: FireBird doesn't work after an upgrade today
El Sáb 04 Oct 2003 10:40, Elie De Brauwer escribió: > On Saturday 04 October 2003 14:18, Martin Marques wrote: > > I upgraded my Debian testing, and all of a sudden MozillaFirebird doesn't > > work any more. I try to execute it from the teminal, and it just doesn't > > show up. No errors, no nothing. > > > > Any ideas? > > Yesterday (or the day before) there was another thread. The point is that > mozilla/mozilla firebird/galeon and other mozilla dependent browser don't > work in unstable for about a month now. A bugid is 207743. > Some people suggest a mozilla downgrade, or you can just sit back and > complain like me while waiting for a solution. This is MozillaFirebird from testing, not unstable. An I read the whole thread, but didn't mind much about it, just because I'm on testing. Anyway, looks like it's the same version for testing and for unstable: bugs:~# apt-cache showpkg mozilla-firebird Package: mozilla-firebird Versions: 0.6.1-7(/var/lib/apt/lists/mirrors.kernel.org_debian_dists_testing_main_binary-sparc_Packages) (/var/lib/apt/lists/mirrors.kernel.org_debian_dists_unstable_main_binary-sparc_Packages) (/var/lib/dpkg/status) [...] -- 09:53:02 up 1 day, 19:30, 2 users, load average: 0.88, 0.65, 0.65 - Martín Marqués |[EMAIL PROTECTED] Programador, Administrador, DBA | Centro de Telematica Universidad Nacional del Litoral -
FireBird doesn't work after an upgrade today
I upgraded my Debian testing, and all of a sudden MozillaFirebird doesn't work any more. I try to execute it from the teminal, and it just doesn't show up. No errors, no nothing. Any ideas? -- 09:16:02 up 1 day, 18:53, 2 users, load average: 0.97, 0.85, 0.65 - Martín Marqués |[EMAIL PROTECTED] Programador, Administrador, DBA | Centro de Telematica Universidad Nacional del Litoral -
Error upgrading apache
Setting up apache (1.3.27.0-2) ... Installing new version of config file /etc/logrotate.d/apache ... /var/lib/dpkg/info/apache.postinst: line 8: /usr/share/apache/postinst.common: No such file or directory dpkg: error processing apache (--configure): subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 1 Errors were encountered while processing: apache E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) Any thoughts? -- Porqué usar una base de datos relacional cualquiera, si podés usar PostgreSQL? - Martín Marqués |[EMAIL PROTECTED] Programador, Administrador, DBA | Centro de Telematica Universidad Nacional del Litoral -
locales not installing
Anybody has an idea on why this is happening. I have a Debian testing on a U5, but with kde3.1 from Debian/unstable. The problem is that kde needed libc6 from unstable so locale was uninstalled, and the version of unstable has unmet dependencies: bugs:~# apt-get install locales Reading Package Lists... Done Building Dependency Tree... Done Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable distribution that some required packages have not yet been created or been moved out of Incoming. Since you only requested a single operation it is extremely likely that the package is simply not installable and a bug report against that package should be filed. The following information may help to resolve the situation: Sorry, but the following packages have unmet dependencies: locales: Depends: glibc-2.3.1-16 E: Sorry, broken packages Any ideas? -- Porqué usar una base de datos relacional cualquiera, si podés usar PostgreSQL? - Martín Marqués |[EMAIL PROTECTED] Programador, Administrador, DBA | Centro de Telematica Universidad Nacional del Litoral -
