Re: [arch-general] [trinity-devel] x86_64 kdesktop.kcrash [SOLVED - it is glibc]

2011-02-22 Thread Baho Utot
On Tuesday, February 22, 2011 07:41:53 PM Allan McRae wrote: > > That prelink patch is very, very unlikely to cause the issue. It was > also the only change between 2.13-3 and 2.13-4... As I pointed out, > there are other distros using that patch without reported issue and it > is now in glibc m

Re: [arch-general] [trinity-devel] x86_64 kdesktop.kcrash [SOLVED - it is glibc]

2011-02-22 Thread Allan McRae
On 23/02/11 10:13, David C. Rankin wrote: On 02/22/2011 05:07 PM, Allan McRae wrote: On 23/02/11 04:23, Lukas Fleischer wrote: On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 11:41:12AM -0600, David C. Rankin wrote: On next reboot/restart, I got the kdesktop.kcrash (attached). So then I downgraded glibc (2.13-4 -

Re: [arch-general] [trinity-devel] x86_64 kdesktop.kcrash [SOLVED - it is glibc]

2011-02-22 Thread David C. Rankin
On 02/22/2011 05:07 PM, Allan McRae wrote: > On 23/02/11 04:23, Lukas Fleischer wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 11:41:12AM -0600, David C. Rankin wrote: >>>On next reboot/restart, I got the kdesktop.kcrash (attached). So then I >>> downgraded glibc (2.13-4 -> 2.13-3), restarted Trinity -> p

Re: [arch-general] [trinity-devel] x86_64 kdesktop.kcrash [SOLVED - it is glibc]

2011-02-22 Thread Allan McRae
On 23/02/11 04:23, Lukas Fleischer wrote: On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 11:41:12AM -0600, David C. Rankin wrote: On next reboot/restart, I got the kdesktop.kcrash (attached). So then I downgraded glibc (2.13-4 -> 2.13-3), restarted Trinity -> perfect No kdesktop,kcrash. It looks like this is a gl

Re: [arch-general] [trinity-devel] x86_64 kdesktop.kcrash [SOLVED - it is glibc]

2011-02-22 Thread David C. Rankin
On 02/22/2011 11:41 AM, David C. Rankin wrote: > > > Guys, > > The problem is glibc-2.13-4. I have about 5 Arch/Trinity Virtualbox VMs. On > one I had not updated, I started Trinity x86_64 and there was NO kdesktop > crash. > I then proceeded to update the VM to the current Arch packages whic

Re: [arch-general] [trinity-devel] x86_64 kdesktop.kcrash [SOLVED - it is glibc]

2011-02-22 Thread David C. Rankin
On 02/22/2011 12:23 PM, Lukas Fleischer wrote: > No, seriously... glibc 2.13-4 introduced a patch from the Fedora glibc > branch that is not included in mainline glibc and fixes issues with > prelink [1]. Obviously, this has some side effects. Seems like it > requires some more investigation. > >

Re: [arch-general] [trinity-devel] x86_64 kdesktop.kcrash [SOLVED - it is glibc]

2011-02-22 Thread David C. Rankin
On 02/22/2011 12:23 PM, Lukas Fleischer wrote: > Allan broke it! > > No, seriously... glibc 2.13-4 introduced a patch from the Fedora glibc > branch that is not included in mainline glibc and fixes issues with > prelink [1]. Obviously, this has some side effects. Seems like it > requires some more

[arch-general] [SOLVED - it's glibc - upstream or Arch?] was Re: xcb_wait_for_reply () from /usr/lib/libxcb.so.1 causing kdesktop crash on x86_64 (is this an upstream issue?)

2011-02-22 Thread David C. Rankin
On 02/19/2011 01:18 PM, David C. Rankin wrote: > On 02/19/2011 03:23 AM, Rémy Oudompheng wrote: >> On 2011/2/19 David C. Rankin wrote: >>> Guys, >>> >>> I have run into an issue that is only causing problems on x86_64. It looks >>> like libxcb. The kcrash file is here: >>> >>> [2k] >>> http://www

Re: [arch-general] [trinity-devel] x86_64 kdesktop.kcrash [SOLVED - it is glibc]

2011-02-22 Thread Lukas Fleischer
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 11:41:12AM -0600, David C. Rankin wrote: > On next reboot/restart, I got the kdesktop.kcrash (attached). So then I > downgraded glibc (2.13-4 -> 2.13-3), restarted Trinity -> perfect No > kdesktop,kcrash. It looks like this is a glibc issue, so I'll follow up > (below) >

Re: [arch-general] [trinity-devel] x86_64 kdesktop.kcrash [SOLVED - it is glibc]

2011-02-22 Thread David C. Rankin
On 02/21/2011 08:41 PM, David C. Rankin wrote: > On 02/21/2011 05:09 PM, PICCORO McKAY Lenz wrote: >> uff i reading this >> http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xcb/2010-March/005818.html and >> seem like that! >> >> any help fron anybody here! >> > > I'll follow up there. I can't believe that an

Re: [arch-general] Kernel Panic on x64 when writting to 1TB External USB disk

2011-02-22 Thread Richard Schütz
I assume that both of you use X and as a consequence don't see the kernel panic output. Try to trigger the error with copying some files to the disk from e.g. tty1. Then useful debug information should be visible there. -- Regards, Richard Schütz

Re: [arch-general] Kernel Panic on x64 when writting to 1TB External USB disk

2011-02-22 Thread Karol Babioch
Hi, as the kernels officially provided by Arch are (completely) Vanilla kernels it it almost certain that problems of this kind are problems of the kernel itself. Therefore it seems to make more sense to report these issues upstream. The people there have more experience how to track down such pr

Re: [arch-general] Kernel Panic on x64 when writting to 1TB External USB disk

2011-02-22 Thread Philipp Überbacher
Excerpts from Victor Silva's message of 2011-02-22 14:52:34 +0100: > Hi folks i'm not 100% sure I'm posting on the right list so if im wrong > please disregard and direct me to the appropriate list. :) > Well I'm having a problem with USB devices causing kernel panic. > I got an external 1 TB USB h

Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] [signoff] util-linux 2.19-3

2011-02-22 Thread Uli Armbruster
* Ionuț Bîru [22.02.2011 14:43]: > On 02/22/2011 03:41 PM, Uli Armbruster wrote: > >I did get the following output when I updated. > > > >Proceed with installation? [Y/n] > >:: Retrieving packages from testing... > > util-linux-2.19-2-i686 1388.8K 987.1K/s 00:00:01 > > the signoff

[arch-general] Kernel Panic on x64 when writting to 1TB External USB disk

2011-02-22 Thread Victor Silva
Hi folks i'm not 100% sure I'm posting on the right list so if im wrong please disregard and direct me to the appropriate list. :) Well I'm having a problem with USB devices causing kernel panic. I got an external 1 TB USB hard disk in NTFS format. When I tried to save some files (downloads from de

Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] [signoff] util-linux 2.19-3

2011-02-22 Thread Ionuț Bîru
On 02/22/2011 03:41 PM, Uli Armbruster wrote: I did get the following output when I updated. Proceed with installation? [Y/n] :: Retrieving packages from testing... util-linux-2.19-2-i686 1388.8K 987.1K/s 00:00:01 the signoff is for 2.19-3 and you got 2.19-2. That bug was fixed

Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] [signoff] util-linux 2.19-3

2011-02-22 Thread Jakob Gruber
On 02/22/2011 02:41 PM, Uli Armbruster wrote: I did get the following output when I updated. Proceed with installation? [Y/n] :: Retrieving packages from testing... util-linux-2.19-2-i686 1388.8K 987.1K/s 00:00:01 This thread is for pkgrel 3 ;)

Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] [signoff] util-linux 2.19-3

2011-02-22 Thread Uli Armbruster
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 1:33 PM, Ionuț Bîru wrote: > On 02/22/2011 02:13 PM, Thomas Bächler wrote: > >> Am 22.02.2011 12:35, schrieb Ionuț Bîru: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> The util-linux-ng project has been renamed back to util-linux. >>> >> >> Why 2.19-3? Shouldn't it be -1? >> > > because tpowa uploade