Re: The road ahead ...
---BeginMessage--- * testing I would appreciate a flood of experiences with the uptodate sparc slink well, emacs20 installation breaks if gcc isn't installed (and it wasn't, on this 200 MB IPC installation), I can't even uninstall it after I uninstalled gcc again. so it probably should depend on gcc. ciao, cm. -- christian mock @ home in vienna, austria sind fremdcancels strafbar? - http://www.tahina.priv.at/bincancel/ Those silly RFCs are all that separate us from the animals! -- Kevin Rodgers in a.r.e ---End Message--- pgpfVKThsOuF6.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: The road ahead ...
Steve Dunham wrote: Christian Meder [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi, this is just a summary of the current Sparc slink status: * boot floppies Seem to work pretty well. Some devices for a working X setup are missing from the initial installation (sunmouse, fb*, kbd; known by Eric). Eric, could you incorporate a generic-sparc target in the makedev package and upload it too (or provide the patches to the list) ? On a SS10 Done. I had problems using the bootfloppies because every command issued in ash was segfaulting (ash_0.3.4-6.2 uploaded yesterday fixes the symptoms but I'm not sure why ;-) Eric, could you test the new ash and include it in the next boot floppies release (it's mandatory for the two SS10 we got around) Ok. Also, Eric seems interested in making everything work on both UltraSparc's and Sparcs, so I'm going to work with him on this. * X Seems to work well on most installations. I uploaded the last X packages and didn't file a bug report with the patch but sent it to Anders who usually does the X stuff on Sparc. I didn't keep up with the latest X prereleases on i386 but we definitly need another X upload after Branden released another X set. Anders, Steve, could you coordinate on syncing up with Branden's prereleases ? I would favor to use the current X sparc patch for frozen and switch to Steve's patches for potato. My packages still need some polishing, but they add Mach64 and UltraSparc support. Maybe we should add my Mach64 and XSun24 servers to the CDROM, in a seperate directory, as a convenience? BTW, is the missing source for X problem was resolved in slink ? * kernel issues 2.0.35 was running pretty well for me. I'm running a 2.2.0-pre8 cvs kernel right now which is up 6 days. Anyone experiences with 2.2.0 ? If we'll agree on a good 2.2.x candiate I'll package it and upload an image. Probably we should provide 2.2.x boot images too. What's your opinion Eric ? IMHO, this should be 2.2.0 with David Millers patches from ftp.kernel.org, plus a very small Ultra patch that he just posted, which fixes fakeroot and postgresql on Ultrasparcs. I will try to add 2.2 kernel support to bootdisks at the end of this week. What should we do about kernel: 1. release slink with 2.0.35 bootdisks and 2.2 as alternate boot method [*] 2. release slink with 2.2 bootdisks BTW, what is the deadline for release ? [*] I don't know wether I will be able to merge both boot methods in one disks set. A more simpler way could be to release 2 independent set of bootdisks (rescue drivers floppy disks are already distincts, therefore I only need to add another root floppy disk for 2.2). If we make this package, we should try to do it right. If you install egcs64_19980921-2 and the binutils from my ftp site, then you can generate both sparc64 and sparc kernels on any machine. (Just supply ARCH=sparc64 to the make command.) It would be nice if we made the package properly generate both kernels. After slink, we can look into adding smp kernels to the list. (I'd propose kernel64-image for the 64bit kernel, unless somebody has a better idea.) * outdated and missing packages I've got most of the outdated stuff compiled and will upload it today or tomorrow (hope I will get Gnome done too ;-) * testing I would appreciate a flood of experiences with the uptodate sparc slink distribution. Serious brokenness is especially welcome but we like supportive cheers too ;-) * binutils One other, minor issue is binutils. I have a small patch to both the rules file and the sparc64 parts of binutils that enable it to compile the sparc64 kernel (without changing it's ability to build sparc32 stuff). While it would be nice to have in slink, it might not be worth the trouble of changing a source package. If the sparc distribution have to run on both sparcs ultras, it will be required for user to build new kernels, therefore it should appear on the dist. Either discuss this with the package maintainer, or upload it as separate source (eg. binutils-sparc64-linux like the already existing binutils-m68k-linux package). IMHO, if it only fixes problem in the sparc64 part, it could be merged to our main binutils package. Regards. -- Eric Delaunay | La guerre justifie l'existence des militaires. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | En les supprimant. Henri Jeanson (1900-1970)
Re: The road ahead ...
On Wed, Jan 27, 1999 at 02:16:54PM +0100, Christian Meder wrote: * kernel issues 2.0.35 was running pretty well for me. I'm running a 2.2.0-pre8 cvs kernel right now which is up 6 days. Anyone experiences with 2.2.0 ? If we'll agree on a good 2.2.x candiate I'll package it and upload an image. Probably we should provide 2.2.x boot images too. What's your opinion Eric ? I'm running the 2.2.0 +CVS, uptime only one day. I've uploaded the kernel patch package for sparc to 2.2.0 to go along with Jonnie Ingrams's (netgod) 2.2.0 source upload. We would just need an image uploaded next. I strongly suggest waiting for 2.2.1 for a release candidate as long as bcwhite will acknowledge we _need_ this kernel in the sparc release. I've had very bad luck with 2.0.x kernels, especially on sun4c's. * testing I would appreciate a flood of experiences with the uptodate sparc slink distribution. Serious brokenness is especially welcome but we like supportive cheers too ;-) I've got slink running on an IPC with 50 days uptime (as of today :) using the 2.1.131 kernel. It's only acting as an ircd so I haven't been doing any harcore testing. My LX with the 2.2.0 kernel (been using 2.1.130 and 2.1.131 as well) has been doing well running apache, wu-ftpd, cvs, openldap and dqueued as well as doing weekly tape backups. This is about the closest I have to a full production server, and I am very pleased with it's performance and stability. -- --- - - --- - - - --- Ben Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] Debian GNU/Linux UnixGroup Admin - Jordan Systems Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- -- - - - --- --- -- The Choice of the GNU Generation
Re: The road ahead ...
On Wed, 27 Jan 1999, Ben Collins wrote: On Wed, Jan 27, 1999 at 02:34:06PM +, Jules Bean wrote: I would appreciate a flood of experiences with the uptodate sparc slink distribution. Serious brokenness is especially welcome but we like supportive cheers too ;-) fakeroot seems to be seriously broken. When we say fakeroot is broken, do we mean the one in libtricks, or the actual fakeroot package. The libtricks version seems to have a problem on glibc 2.1 systems, this was verified by some people using the other ports. I just tries the actual fakeroot package and it seemed to work fine. I mean libtricks. Is fakeroot still available for slink? Presumably it is, and I did something stupid (I did try to find it, but I could have made some foolish mistake). Jules /+---+-\ | Jelibean aka | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 6 Evelyn Rd| | Jules aka | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Richmond, Surrey | | Julian Bean | [EMAIL PROTECTED]| TW9 2TF *UK* | ++---+-+ | War doesn't demonstrate who's right... just who's left. | | When privacy is outlawed... only the outlaws have privacy. | \--/
Re: The road ahead ...
On 27/01, Jules Bean wrote: | When we say fakeroot is broken, do we mean the one in libtricks, or the | actual fakeroot package. The libtricks version seems to have a problem | on glibc 2.1 systems, this was verified by some people using the other | ports. I just tries the actual fakeroot package and it seemed to work | fine. | | I mean libtricks. | | Is fakeroot still available for slink? Presumably it is, and I did | something stupid (I did try to find it, but I could have made some foolish | mistake). apt-get install fakeroot (it worked just fine for me 3 hours ago when I noticed the segmentation fault with the libtricks one) Sam -- Samuel Tardieu -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: The road ahead ...
On Wed, Jan 27, 1999 at 03:27:52PM +, Jules Bean wrote: I mean libtricks. Is fakeroot still available for slink? Presumably it is, and I did something stupid (I did try to find it, but I could have made some foolish mistake). It wasn't available for awhile, and seems to have reappeared. Then again I might have gotten it from potato :/ but it works :) -- --- - - --- - - - --- Ben Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] Debian GNU/Linux UnixGroup Admin - Jordan Systems Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- -- - - - --- --- -- The Choice of the GNU Generation
Re: The road ahead ...
Christian Meder [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi, this is just a summary of the current Sparc slink status: * boot floppies Seem to work pretty well. Some devices for a working X setup are missing from the initial installation (sunmouse, fb*, kbd; known by Eric). Eric, could you incorporate a generic-sparc target in the makedev package and upload it too (or provide the patches to the list) ? On a SS10 I had problems using the bootfloppies because every command issued in ash was segfaulting (ash_0.3.4-6.2 uploaded yesterday fixes the symptoms but I'm not sure why ;-) Eric, could you test the new ash and include it in the next boot floppies release (it's mandatory for the two SS10 we got around) Also, Eric seems interested in making everything work on both UltraSparc's and Sparcs, so I'm going to work with him on this. * X Seems to work well on most installations. I uploaded the last X packages and didn't file a bug report with the patch but sent it to Anders who usually does the X stuff on Sparc. I didn't keep up with the latest X prereleases on i386 but we definitly need another X upload after Branden released another X set. Anders, Steve, could you coordinate on syncing up with Branden's prereleases ? I would favor to use the current X sparc patch for frozen and switch to Steve's patches for potato. My packages still need some polishing, but they add Mach64 and UltraSparc support. Maybe we should add my Mach64 and XSun24 servers to the CDROM, in a seperate directory, as a convenience? * kernel issues 2.0.35 was running pretty well for me. I'm running a 2.2.0-pre8 cvs kernel right now which is up 6 days. Anyone experiences with 2.2.0 ? If we'll agree on a good 2.2.x candiate I'll package it and upload an image. Probably we should provide 2.2.x boot images too. What's your opinion Eric ? IMHO, this should be 2.2.0 with David Millers patches from ftp.kernel.org, plus a very small Ultra patch that he just posted, which fixes fakeroot and postgresql on Ultrasparcs. If we make this package, we should try to do it right. If you install egcs64_19980921-2 and the binutils from my ftp site, then you can generate both sparc64 and sparc kernels on any machine. (Just supply ARCH=sparc64 to the make command.) It would be nice if we made the package properly generate both kernels. After slink, we can look into adding smp kernels to the list. (I'd propose kernel64-image for the 64bit kernel, unless somebody has a better idea.) * outdated and missing packages I've got most of the outdated stuff compiled and will upload it today or tomorrow (hope I will get Gnome done too ;-) * testing I would appreciate a flood of experiences with the uptodate sparc slink distribution. Serious brokenness is especially welcome but we like supportive cheers too ;-) * binutils One other, minor issue is binutils. I have a small patch to both the rules file and the sparc64 parts of binutils that enable it to compile the sparc64 kernel (without changing it's ability to build sparc32 stuff). While it would be nice to have in slink, it might not be worth the trouble of changing a source package. Steve [EMAIL PROTECTED]
