Bug#275059: kernel-image-2.6.8-1-k7: cannot unregister_ndetdevice, shutdown impossible...

2004-10-05 Thread Roland Lezuo
Package: kernel-image-2.6.8-1-k7 Version: 2.6.8-3 Severity: important im using pptp to dial in to my ISP, and when trying to stop pptp I get the following message: unregister_netdevice: waitng for ppp0 to become free. Usage count = 2; this message floods my dmesg, ifconfig ppp0 hangs and reboot/hal

Bug#275037: Writing to parallel port causes kernel oops

2004-10-05 Thread Noah Massey
Package: kernel-image-2.6.8-1-sparc64 Version: 2.6.8-2 When writing to /dev/lp0, either directly (cat) or through CUPS, I get \|/ \|/ "@'/ .. \`@" /_| \__/ |_\ \__U_/ parallel(653): Kernel bad sw trap 5 [#1] TSTATE: 008811f09

Bug#274939: How can editing a binary kernel be suggested?

2004-10-05 Thread Jens Schmalzing
Hi, > How can this be suggested on an official packaged kernel? Because the only alternative is to recompile. > Asking an end user to binary-edit a kernel is mindless, from my point of view. The most likely explanation for this point of view of yours is that you don't really know what you're ta

Processed: Re: Bug#274939: kernel-patch-powerpc: How can editing a binary kernel be suggested?

2004-10-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reassign 274939 kernel-patch-powerpc-2.6.8 Bug#274939: kernel-patch-powerpc: How can editing a binary kernel be suggested? Warning: Unknown package 'kernel-patch-powerpc' Bug reassigned from package `kernel-patch-powerpc' to `kernel-patch-powerpc-2.6.8

Bug#274988: XFS crash in kernel-image-2.6.8-1-686-smp

2004-10-05 Thread Jan Eringa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Package: kernel-image-2.6.8-1-686-smp Version: 2.6.8-3 Severity: Important Hardware layout - - Dual Xeon + Latest BIOS 1 GB ram 2 x 3ware SATA raid controllers + Latest Firmware All disks live on the 3ware 9xxx controllers Contro

Re: Dropping 386 support

2004-10-05 Thread Martin Schulze
peter green wrote: > what about changing the 486 emulation kernel patch so that it completely > disables itself on non 386 processors Did you read the patch? I thougth that was already the case from how it is invoked. > this way it would only have security issues on pure 386 which wouldn't be >