On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 02:48:08PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Nov 30, 2006 at 01:59:30PM +0100, Ramon Sanchez wrote:
This is the error, they appears a lot of times:
This error looks like broken hardware, not something software can fix.
The error doesn't appear in 2.6.8 and
Your message dated Sat, 2 Dec 2006 09:16:42 +0100
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#400544: Fails to install properly on Sarge
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
severity 400488 important
Bug#400488: no fans after S3 sleep on many laptops
Severity set to `important' from `grave'
thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator,
* Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [061201 20:30]:
- What is stopping 2.6.18 to enter testing ? The PTS says Should ignore,
but forced by vorlon, so does this mean it will enter testing today ?
What about the remaining (or new) RC bugs ? Some of them being open
against 2.6.17, so
On Friday 01 December 2006 23:33, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I just noticed that Adrian Bunk's stable 2.6.16.y branch has been
removed from Etch, and I think that sucks.
Not quite true: Adrian Bunk's tree has never been in Etch. The
linux-2.6.16 package contained just the regular 2.6.16 kernel
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 10:37:01AM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote:
* Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [061201 20:30]:
- What is stopping 2.6.18 to enter testing ? The PTS says Should ignore,
but forced by vorlon, so does this mean it will enter testing today ?
What about the remaining
Package: initramfs-tools
Severity: Important
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 05:45:52PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
Le Thu, Nov 30, 2006 at 04:12:56PM +0100, Holger Levsen a écrit :
On Thursday 30 November 2006 12:20, Charles Plessy wrote:
On the other hand, I recommend to test wether they
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
severity 378344 grave
Bug#378344: initramfs-tools: Should be able to force root device for
update-initramfs
Severity set to `grave' from `wishlist'
# Upping severity, since this bug makes a PReP d-i install not being able to
# boot in the resulting
severity 378344 grave
# Upping severity, since this bug makes a PReP d-i install not being able to
# boot in the resulting system. Furthermore, this is a general regression from
# sarge and initrd-tools.
Thanks
Max, ...
When playing with initramfs-tools Motorola Powerstack PReP box, i noticed
Package: linux-image-2.6.18-3-686
Version: 2.6.18-6
Severity: normal
Hi,
Grub2 put update-grub in another directory (/usr/sbin/update-grub instead of
/sbin/update-grub).
# apt-get install
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree... Done
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove
On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 08:26:10PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
- What is stopping 2.6.18 to enter testing ? The PTS says Should ignore,
but forced by vorlon, so does this mean it will enter testing today ?
What about the remaining (or new) RC bugs ? Some of them being open
against
I think it is a good ideea to adopt 2.6.19 for etch if its possible. I
looked over the changelogs in 2.6.18 and there is one issue that
concerns me:
commit a4fce7747b167aa5e9aa43c4f816744d8a97e021
Author: Patrick McHardy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed Oct 11 01:53:26 2006 -0700
NETFILTER:
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 11:36:30AM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 08:26:10PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
- What is stopping 2.6.18 to enter testing ? The PTS says Should ignore,
but forced by vorlon, so does this mean it will enter testing today ?
What about the
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 10:51:57AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
The -k7 issue, i don't know, can it be a flavour that was dropped or
something ?
linux-latest-2.6 is not a candidate because not yet uploaded on sparc.
That's the easy part; linux-modules-extra-2.6 is the harder part, currently
Package: linux-image-2.6.18-3-powerpc
Version: 2.6.18-6
Severity: normal
When I booted linux-image-2.6.18-3-powerpc today, Xorg showed a black
screen on my PowerBook G4 (TiBook) and nothing more, rendering X rather
unusable. When I use my brightness-adjustment keys up or down, it switches
to a
Your message dated Sat, 2 Dec 2006 11:38:14 +0100
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#401274: linux-image-2.6.18-3-686: /sbin/update-grub vs
/usr/sbin/update-grub (grub2)
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 11:48:07AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
We need another upload of linux-2.6 and linux-modules-extra-2.6 to fix
the following issues:
Ok, do we have a plan for this ?
Not yet.
I'm not longer interrested in communicating errors in software, which is
not able to catch
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 02:41:08AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 10:51:57AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
The -k7 issue, i don't know, can it be a flavour that was dropped or
something ?
linux-latest-2.6 is not a candidate because not yet uploaded on sparc.
That's the
Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 11:01:17AM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
Grub2 put update-grub in another directory (/usr/sbin/update-grub instead of
/sbin/update-grub).
You should follow the warnigs which are emitted by at least the
update-grub from grub 1:
reassign 401229 initramfs-tools
severity 401229 important
retitle 401229 [hppa] zalon7xx driver not included in initrd
thanks
On Saturday 02 December 2006 00:11, Kurt Fitzner wrote:
Comments/Problems:
A necessary device driver for my system (zalon7xx) was on the install
CD, but not included
Current suituation - when initramfs for one semi-randomly selected
linux-image package is updated, and others are not, and even administrator
is not notified in any way, leads to system inconsistensy.
Which I believe is against debian quality standards.
I'm forwarding this to debian-devel for
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
reassign 401229 initramfs-tools
Bug#401229: installation-reports
Bug reassigned from package `installation-reports' to `initramfs-tools'.
severity 401229 important
Bug#401229: installation-reports
Severity set to `important' from `normal'
retitle
Hi folks
I intend to drop old patches from 2.6.19, this includes:
- Anything not categorized (debian/patches/*.patch). There is one
problematic one: alpha-prctl.patch, which is not upstream; the alpha
maintainer have to check that and fix the category.
- Anything not debian specific and not
reassign 378344 lvm2
rettitle 378344 provide an howto mv root on lvm2 volume
severity 378344 wishlist
stop
On Sat, 02 Dec 2006, Sven Luther wrote:
severity 378344 grave
# Upping severity, since this bug makes a PReP d-i install not being able to
# boot in the resulting system. Furthermore,
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
reassign 378344 lvm2
Bug#378344: initramfs-tools: Should be able to force root device for
update-initramfs
Bug reassigned from package `initramfs-tools' to `lvm2'.
rettitle 378344 provide an howto mv root on lvm2 volume
Unknown command or malformed
On Sat, 02 Dec 2006, Steve Langasek wrote:
snipp
Frankly, 2.6.16 was a total cock-up. Aside from all the extra work it made
for the release team, I even found patches I had to reapply for alpha
because they were dropped on the floor when 2.6.16 was merged to trunk. I
am very much opposed to
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 12:10:00PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 11:48:07AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
We need another upload of linux-2.6 and linux-modules-extra-2.6 to fix
the following issues:
Ok, do we have a plan for this ?
Not yet.
Can we upload that today or
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 02:44:11PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 12:10:00PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 11:48:07AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
We need another upload of linux-2.6 and linux-modules-extra-2.6 to fix
the following issues:
Ok,
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 03:46:58PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
Hi folks
I intend to drop old patches from 2.6.19, this includes:
- Anything not categorized (debian/patches/*.patch). There is one
problematic one: alpha-prctl.patch, which is not upstream; the alpha
maintainer have to
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 03:46:58PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
I intend to drop old patches from 2.6.19, this includes:
- Anything not categorized (debian/patches/*.patch). There is one
problematic one: alpha-prctl.patch, which is not upstream; the alpha
maintainer have to check that and
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 03:46:58PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
Hi folks
I intend to drop old patches from 2.6.19, this includes:
- Anything not categorized (debian/patches/*.patch). There is one
problematic one: alpha-prctl.patch, which is not upstream; the alpha
maintainer have to
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 03:52:59PM +0100, maximilian attems wrote:
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 03:46:58PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
Hi folks
I intend to drop old patches from 2.6.19, this includes:
- Anything not categorized (debian/patches/*.patch). There is one
problematic one:
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 04:18:39PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 03:46:58PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
I intend to drop old patches from 2.6.19, this includes:
- Anything not categorized (debian/patches/*.patch). There is one
problematic one: alpha-prctl.patch,
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 05:03:51PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
Please don't drop the powerpc patches, they were all checkd and updated for
2.6.19-rc6.
Than fix the categories.
Let's keep it for now, if i don't get it resubmitted before 2.6.20, we can
drop it.
It does not build at all and it
On Sat, 02 Dec 2006, Russell Coker wrote:
The following will significantly reduce the size of an initramfs when busybox
is used while also enabling all busybox commands (handy if you have an option
to run a shell from the initramfs for recovery). In spite of what maks
thinks, the busybox
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 05:23:42PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 05:03:51PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
Please don't drop the powerpc patches, they were all checkd and updated for
2.6.19-rc6.
Than fix the categories.
fix the categories ?
Let's keep it for now, if i
Package: initramfs-tools
Version: 0.85b
Severity: normal
When lilo -t fails update-initramfs exits with an error (due to set -e)
but provides no indication to the user. When called in postinst the
failure is reported by, e.g., aptitude but there is no explanation of
what went wrong.
This could
initramfs-tools_0.85c_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
initramfs-tools_0.85c.dsc
initramfs-tools_0.85c.tar.gz
initramfs-tools_0.85c_all.deb
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 10:06:21AM -0700, David Anselmi wrote:
When lilo -t fails update-initramfs exits with an error (due to set -e)
but provides no indication to the user. When called in postinst the
failure is reported by, e.g., aptitude but there is no explanation of
what went wrong.
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 11:36:30AM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 08:26:10PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
- What is stopping 2.6.18 to enter testing ? The PTS says Should ignore,
but forced by vorlon, so does this mean it will enter testing today ?
What about the
Accepted:
initramfs-tools_0.85c.dsc
to pool/main/i/initramfs-tools/initramfs-tools_0.85c.dsc
initramfs-tools_0.85c.tar.gz
to pool/main/i/initramfs-tools/initramfs-tools_0.85c.tar.gz
initramfs-tools_0.85c_all.deb
to pool/main/i/initramfs-tools/initramfs-tools_0.85c_all.deb
Override entries
Your message dated Sat, 02 Dec 2006 18:02:03 +
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#401269: fixed in initramfs-tools 0.85c
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is
On Sat, 2 Dec 2006 11:36:30 +0100, Bastian Blank [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 08:26:10PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
- What is stopping 2.6.18 to enter testing ? The PTS says Should
ignore,
but forced by vorlon, so does this mean it will enter testing
today ? What about
On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 10:33:37 +0100, Jean Parpaillon [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Dear kernel packagers, I'm trying to packaging a linux 2.6.11 kernel
for Sid. I started from
http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/kernel/dists/trunk/linux-2.6 to package
it. After patching my linux-2.6.11 vanilla to compile
Package: kernel-image-2.6.8-2-386
Version: 2.6.8-16
I've found this on Dec. 1st in my syslog while running rsync:
kernel BUG at mm/rmap.c:251!
invalid operand: [#1]
PREEMPT
Modules linked in: tun rtc ipt_MASQUERADE ipt_LOG iptable_filter parport_pc
parport agpgart capability commoncap
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 12:43:06PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Sat, 2 Dec 2006 11:36:30 +0100, Bastian Blank [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 08:26:10PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
- What is stopping 2.6.18 to enter testing ? The PTS says Should
ignore,
but forced
Package: linux-2.6
Severity: important
Version: 2.6.18-6
Tags: d-i
Since d-i switched to 2.6.18 I'm seeing significant delays during boot
of the installer in two places. See dmesg fragment below (full dmesg
attached).
If I boot the installer with an RC1 image (using 2.6.17), there are no
Package: linux-image-2.6.18-3-k7
Version: 2.6.18-6
After installing the version 2.6.18-6 of the kernel, my machine (SMP,
AthlonMP) just freezes under heavy disk IO (not immediately, but after a
few minutes).
I tried the modules dpt_i2o and i2o_block for my Adaptec 2400A raid
controller, and even
Teodor-Adrian MICU [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think it is a good ideea to adopt 2.6.19 for etch if its possible.
Please don't unless we can't avoid it. Each time we bring in a new
kernel, those of us who maintain external kernel modules have to do a
bunch of work to catch up with all the API
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 03:41:24PM +0100, maximilian attems wrote:
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 02:44:11PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 12:10:00PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 11:48:07AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
We need another upload of
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 01:41:50PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
yes i want to add 2.6.18.5 to linux-2.6 sid,
not sure if it breaks abi through..
Sounds to me like something to look into *after* 2.6.18 has had a chance to
reach testing?
You have to force them than.
Bastian
--
Killing is
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 10:57:59AM -0800, Horacio wrote:
Package: kernel-image-2.6.8-2-386
Version: 2.6.8-16
I've found this on Dec. 1st in my syslog while running rsync:
Note that you are running a kernel with a large number of security
vulnerabilities - I strongly suggest upgrading to
FYI: The status of the mkvmlinuz source package
in Debian's testing distribution has changed.
Previous version: 24
Current version: 27
--
This email is automatically generated; [EMAIL PROTECTED] is responsible.
See http://people.debian.org/~henning/trille/ for more information.
--
To
On Friday 01 December 2006 21:30, Bastian Blank wrote:
tags 400752 moreinfo
thanks
On Wed, Nov 29, 2006 at 01:17:20AM +1000, Kel Modderman wrote:
Package: linux-modules-extra-2.6
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch
Please consider including ndiswrapper. Patch attached, based on existing
Package: mkvmlinuz
Version: 27
Tags: l10n, patch
Severity: wishlist
Portuguese (pt) translation for mkvmlinuz's debconf messages
by Rui Branco ruipb _at_ debianpt.org.
Feel free to use it.
For translation updated please contact Rui Branco and CC the Portuguese
translation team traduz _at_
55 matches
Mail list logo
