Horms wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 07:05:59PM +0200, Maik Zumstrull wrote:
>
>>Please evaluate just how broken ATAPI-over-SATA really is right now and
>>consider enabling it. AFAIK other distributions have been running with
>>it since 2.6.9 or something, so it can't be all bad from an end-user
On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 02:40:01AM +0200, Marco Amadori wrote:
> > From: Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 12:22:08PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
>
> > > > > - initrd-tools needs to loose devfs usage.
> > > > BTW, isn't it time to switch to initramfs ?
> > > Does it work
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tag 324202 +patch
Bug#324202: include ReiserFS ACL support in 2.6.12 kernel
There were no tags set.
Tags added: patch
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator
tag 324202 +patch
thanks
On Sat, Aug 20, 2005 at 11:40:59PM +0200, David Madore wrote:
> Package: linux-image-2.6.12-1-386
> Version: 2.6.12-5
> Severity: minor
> Tag: patch sid
>
> Please include the following config snippet on all archs:
>
> CONFIG_REISERFS_PROC_INFO=y
> CONFIG_REISERFS_FS_XAT
tags 323999 +sarge
tags 323999 +wontfix
thanks
On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 10:53:50AM -0700, Allyn, MarkX A wrote:
> Package: kernel-image-2.6.8-i386
> Version: 2.6.8-16
>
> There is a symbolic link at /lib/modules/2.6.8-2-386/source
> which points to someone's home directory (horms). The horms
> h
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 323999 +sarge
Bug#323999: Dangling Symlink in /lib/modules/2.6.8-2-386/source in
kernel-image-2.6.8-16
There were no tags set.
Bug#268971: kernel-image-2.6.8-1-686-smp: dangling link
Bug#270577: kernel-image-2.6.8-1-k7: Source symlink points to bu
On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 11:26:22PM +0200, Guenter Geiger wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, 29 Aug 2005, Nicholas Humfrey wrote:
>
> > Package: realtime-lsm
> > Version: 0.1.1-6
> > Severity: grave
> > Justification: renders package unusable
> >
> > The 2.6.8-2 kernel (which is the default on sarge) does n
On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 07:05:59PM +0200, Maik Zumstrull wrote:
> Bastian Blank wrote:
>
> > The following tasks needs to be done for 2.6.13:
> > - Merge of the current trees.
> > - Config updates.
> > - initrd-tools needs to loose devfs usage.
>
> One thing I'd like to add for the wishlist:
>
>
Hi,
I can't find linux-image for em64t, what should I have for my source.list, currently I am running sid with main contrib non-free.
Regardsdann frazier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 2005-08-29 at 17:27 +0200, Frederik Schueler wrote:> Hello,> > you need kernel-nonfree-modules, to be foun
> From: Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 12:22:08PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > > > - initrd-tools needs to loose devfs usage.
> > > BTW, isn't it time to switch to initramfs ?
> > Does it work?
> Supposedly, best time now to find out, don't you think ?
I saw that
On Mon, 29 Aug 2005, Nicholas Humfrey wrote:
> Package: realtime-lsm
> Version: 0.1.1-6
> Severity: grave
> Justification: renders package unusable
>
> The 2.6.8-2 kernel (which is the default on sarge) does not
> have CONFIG_SECURITY_SELINUX enabled, which means it is not
> possible to use thi
On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 12:22:08PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 11:50:33AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > BTW, was 2.6.13 already released ? Or any idea when it will be ?
>
> The mail arrived 2:17 MEST.
>
> > Also, i believe we need a 2.6.12-6 upload which fix the remainin
On Mon, 2005-08-29 at 17:27 +0200, Frederik Schueler wrote:
> Hello,
>
> you need kernel-nonfree-modules, to be found here:
>
> http://213.178.77.236/kernel/amd64/
>
> or use 2.6.12 wich has tg3 support added back thanks to broadcom
> relicensing the driver.
Yes, 2.6.11 is no longer maintained,
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 23:09 +0100, Thom May wrote:
> Package: linux-image-2.6.12-1-mckinley
> Severity: important
> Version: 2.6.12-5
>
> The xfs module fails to load with an error about invalid module format.
> modprobe: FATAL: Error inserting xfs (/lib/modules...): Invalid module
> format
>
> T
Bastian Blank wrote:
> The following tasks needs to be done for 2.6.13:
> - Merge of the current trees.
> - Config updates.
> - initrd-tools needs to loose devfs usage.
One thing I'd like to add for the wishlist:
Please evaluate just how broken ATAPI-over-SATA really is right now and
consider en
Hi!
I am sorry to tell you that the patches did not work with the current
kernel-source-2.6.8 (2.6.8-16)!
I tried with both gcc-3.3 and gcc-3.4 and allways got the following
error message from make-kpkg:
CC [M] drivers/input/gameport/ns558.o
drivers/input/gameport/ns558.c: In function `ns
Hello,
you need kernel-nonfree-modules, to be found here:
http://213.178.77.236/kernel/amd64/
or use 2.6.12 wich has tg3 support added back thanks to broadcom
relicensing the driver.
Best regards
Frederik Schueler
On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 08:13:40AM -0700, mynullvoid wrote:
> I just installed
Hi,
I just installed kernel-image-2.6.11-9-em64t-p4 but unfortunately the kernel doesn't have the module for Ethernet controller: Broadcom Corporation NetXtreme BCM5721 Gigabit Ethernet PCI Express (rev 11).
Anyone can assist.
Thank you__Do You
On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 12:22:08PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 11:50:33AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > BTW, was 2.6.13 already released ? Or any idea when it will be ?
>
> The mail arrived 2:17 MEST.
>
> > Also, i believe we need a 2.6.12-6 upload which fix the remainin
On Monday 29 August 2005 12:35, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Aug 29, Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > In effect this means that any user having udev installed will have to
> > put udev on hold.
>
> No, if the kernel has not been upgraded yet then preinst will fail.
Hmm. Won't that fail the who
On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 11:26:09AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> reassign 325484 udev
> retitle 325484 udev lacks sarge->etch upgrade path
> thanks
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 01:46:49AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > udev >= 0.060-1 and kernels >= 2.6.12 should enter testing at the same
> > time.
FYI. I thought this would end up on d-kernel, but only saw afterwards that
horms had reassigned the bug to udev :-)
I fully agree with his assessment: this is no way to do upgrades.
-- Forwarded Message --
Subject: Re: Bug#325484: udev >= 0.060-1 and kernels >= 2.6.12
Date: Mon
On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 11:50:33AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> BTW, was 2.6.13 already released ? Or any idea when it will be ?
The mail arrived 2:17 MEST.
> Also, i believe we need a 2.6.12-6 upload which fix the remaining problems and
> can go into sarge.
> Do we have any plans regarding that ?
Bastian Blank wrote:
> Hi folks
>
> The following tasks needs to be done for 2.6.13:
> - Merge of the current trees.
> - Config updates.
> - initrd-tools needs to loose devfs usage.
>
> Bastian
>
I'm not shure whether my information is correct, but AFAIK is pcmcia-cs
obsoleted with 2.6.13 and
On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 11:40:47AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> Hi folks
>
BTW, was 2.6.13 already released ? Or any idea when it will be ?
Also, i believe we need a 2.6.12-6 upload which fix the remaining problems and
can go into sarge.
Do we have any plans regarding that ?
> The following t
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 325484 udev
Bug#325484: udev >= 0.060-1 and kernels >= 2.6.12
Bug reassigned from package `udev,linux-2.6' to `udev'.
> retitle 325484 udev lacks sarge->etch upgrade path
Bug#325484: udev >= 0.060-1 and kernels >= 2.6.12
Changed Bug title.
>
reassign 325484 udev
retitle 325484 udev lacks sarge->etch upgrade path
thanks
On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 01:46:49AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> udev >= 0.060-1 and kernels >= 2.6.12 should enter testing at the same
> time.
You have to provide a proper sarge->etch upgrade path. This bug is the
sign
Hi folks
The following tasks needs to be done for 2.6.13:
- Merge of the current trees.
- Config updates.
- initrd-tools needs to loose devfs usage.
Bastian
--
Those who hate and fight must stop themselves -- otherwise it is not stopped.
-- Spock, "Day of the Dove", stardate unk
On Aug 29, Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, badly worded maybe :), but i think your RC bug on the kernel without
> prior discussion may have been somewhat rude.
It was discussed with vorlon.
> Anyway, i was expecting some explanation about the reason why this mess
> happened, especi
On Aug 29, Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Have a compatibility udev maybe ? Also you have to remember, that some people
It could not work in an acceptable way.
Please read the huge past threads about this.
> like or need to run two sets of kernels.
And I want a pony.
--
ciao,
Marco
On Aug 29, Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It was discussed with vorlon.
> Vorlon is not the kernel team however.
But he is the one who decides when packages should or should not go in
testing, which is what this bug is about.
> What do you think of having two udev packages, which are
On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 11:04:18AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Aug 29, Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Well, badly worded maybe :), but i think your RC bug on the kernel without
> > prior discussion may have been somewhat rude.
> It was discussed with vorlon.
Vorlon is not the ke
On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 10:54:59AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Aug 29, Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Did you really need to make such a mess about this ?
> Yes, but thank you for asking about it.
Well, badly worded maybe :), but i think your RC bug on the kernel without
prior d
On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 10:27:09AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Aug 29, Ryan Underwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > In my case, I have installed a 2.6.12 kernel image, but not yet
> > rebooted. udev refuses to install because the RUNNING kernel is 2.6.11
> > not 2.6.12. preinst is a poor
On Sun, Aug 28, 2005 at 10:08:17PM -0500, Ryan Underwood wrote:
>
> In my case, I have installed a 2.6.12 kernel image, but not yet
> rebooted. udev refuses to install because the RUNNING kernel is 2.6.11
> not 2.6.12. preinst is a poor place for this check, imho.
Indeed, this whole situation i
On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 01:46:49AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> Package: udev,linux-2.6
> Severity: grave
>
> udev >= 0.060-1 and kernels >= 2.6.12 should enter testing at the same
> time.
> If udev is first it will refuse to be upgraded (or install but disable
> itself on new installs), if the ke
On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 10:22:59AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Aug 29, Horms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Can this be resolved by some dependancies and conflicts?
> This is supposed to be a FAQ: packages cannot have explicit dependencies
> on kernel packages.
While doing breakage things i
On Aug 29, Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Did you really need to make such a mess about this ?
Yes, but thank you for asking about it.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Aug 29, Horms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can this be resolved by some dependancies and conflicts?
This is supposed to be a FAQ: packages cannot have explicit dependencies
on kernel packages.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Aug 29, Ryan Underwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In my case, I have installed a 2.6.12 kernel image, but not yet
> rebooted. udev refuses to install because the RUNNING kernel is 2.6.11
> not 2.6.12. preinst is a poor place for this check, imho.
If you think you have a better idea, feel fr
40 matches
Mail list logo
