On Sun, 2010-03-28 at 03:08 +0200, Regid Ichira wrote:
> Package: linux-source-2.6.32
> Version: 2.6.32-9
> Severity: normal
>
> I am making my own kernels out of Debian's linux-source. I upgraded
> the source from 32-5 to 32-9. I have added a few more kernel modules
> with 32-9. I believe the
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> tags 575660 moreinfo
Bug #575660 [linux-source-2.6.32] With last kernels, terminal/console
processing getting worth.
Added tag(s) moreinfo.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system
Package: linux-source-2.6.32
Version: 2.6.32-9
Severity: normal
I am making my own kernels out of Debian's linux-source. I upgraded
the source from 32-5 to 32-9. I have added a few more kernel modules
with 32-9. I believe the config diff is not relevant for this report.
1) With 32-9, when tt
Your message dated Sat, 27 Mar 2010 23:29:24 +
with message-id <1269732564.8653.160.ca...@localhost>
and subject line Re: Bug#575630: linux-image-2.6.33-2-686: Intel wifi does not
save power any more
has caused the Debian Bug report #575630,
regarding linux-image-2.6.33-2-686: Intel wifi does
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reassign 575648 linux-2.6
Bug #575648 [udev] Lots of udevd --daemon running 100% CPU all the time.
Bug reassigned from package 'udev' to 'linux-2.6'.
> forcemerge 572537 575648
Bug#572537: udev spins on drm device
Bug#575648: Lots of udevd --daemo
reassign 575648 linux-2.6
forcemerge 572537 575648
thanks
On Mar 27, leonardo.fava...@email.it wrote:
> Running htop I can see many udevd --daemon entries. Most of them are running
> 0.0% whilst the top two are runnin 90/100% of both cpus. If I stop the top
> two they restart and reach the 100% a
On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 06:11:15PM +, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > OK, that works, thanks. We have got to get this documented somewhere
> > now that the deprecated option is broken. There is no mention of it at
> > http://wiki.debian.org/Xen and simple googling is far from conclusive.
>
> Would you
Package: linux-2.6
Version: 2.6.33-1~experimental.4
Severity: normal
I recently switched to the new 2.6.33 kernel because of its support
for the TRIM command for my SSD disk, but it turns out that it has one
very serious regression: its iwl3945 driver seems not to provide any
power-saving any more
Package: initramfs-tools
Version: 0.93.4
Severity: normal
With swap on lvm, /etc/initramfs-tools/conf.d/resume containing UUID prevented
the system to resume changing back to dev/mapper (/dev/mapper/vg0-swap) allowed
my system to resume from hibernate As my problem appears linked to this /etc
/in
On Sat, 2010-03-27 at 18:07 +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 05:28:28PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > > > What was the last known working version?
> > > The one from lenny. Well, for some values of "working" at least :)
> >
> > Well, Lenny have two variants. The early pv-ops
On Sat, 2010-03-27 at 17:10 +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> I extracted that initrd image now and I see
>
> lib/modules/2.6.32-4-xen-amd64/kernel/drivers/block/xen-blkfront.ko
>
> in it. Are you saying it could have gotten missed by the initrd init scripts
> even though it's there?
I was saying it
On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 05:28:28PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > > What was the last known working version?
> > The one from lenny. Well, for some values of "working" at least :)
>
> Well, Lenny have two variants. The early pv-ops and the oldstyle one.
We had early pvops in lenny? Where? :)
>
On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 05:15:10PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> I missed Bastian's message as I'm not subscribed - please keep me in Cc:.
Please add this to your muttrc then:
| lists "@lists.debian.org"
> > What was the last known working version?
> The one from lenny. Well, for some values of
On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 11:56:25AM +0100, joy wrote:
> [0.610445] blkfront: xvda1: barriers enabled
> done.
> Begin: Mounting root file system ... Begin: Running /scripts/local-top ...
> done.
> Begin: Waiting for root file system ...
>
> Can anything be done? I thought the domUs were suppose
On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 12:02:01PM +, Ian Campbell wrote:
> xen-blkfront is a module in the pvops based 2.6.32-x-xen-amd64 where as
> it was statically linked in the non-pvops 2.6.26-x-xen-and64 images.
> This already happened in Lenny for 32 bit guests (sort of) since the
> -686-bigmem kernel
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> tags 575157 pending
Bug #575157 [initramfs-tools] Calling `cpio` can produce error messages when
working correctly
Added tag(s) pending.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system adm
On Sat, 2010-03-27 at 15:53 +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 12:02:01PM +, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Sat, 2010-03-27 at 11:56 +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> > > [0.610445] blkfront: xvda1: barriers enabled
> > xen-blkfront is a module in the pvops based 2.6.32-x-xen-amd
On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 12:02:01PM +, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-03-27 at 11:56 +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> > [0.610445] blkfront: xvda1: barriers enabled
> xen-blkfront is a module in the pvops based 2.6.32-x-xen-amd64 where as
> it was statically linked in the non-pvops 2.6.26-x-
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> forwarded 571980 https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15638
Bug #571980 [linux-2.6] linux-image-2.6.32-trunk-686: Kernel oops when ipmi
modules loaded on ibm 326m
Set Bug forwarded-to-address to
'https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?i
Le jeudi 25 mars 2010 à 22:59 +0100, maximilian attems a écrit :
> please report upstream on bugzilla.kernel.org with oops dmesg there
> and let us know bug nr so that it can be tracked.
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15638
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lis
On Sat, 2010-03-27 at 11:56 +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> If I try to boot 2.6.32-4-xen-amd64 on a 2.6.26-2-xen-amd64 (lenny) dom0,
> it gets stuck at:
>
> [0.120653] XENBUS: Device with no driver: device/vbd/769
> [0.120658] XENBUS: Device with no driver: device/vif/0
> [0.120
On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 11:56:25AM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> If I try to boot 2.6.32-4-xen-amd64 on a 2.6.26-2-xen-amd64 (lenny) dom0,
> it gets stuck at:
What was the last known working version?
> [0.120653] XENBUS: Device with no driver: device/vbd/769
> [0.120658] XENBUS: Device with
Hi,
If I try to boot 2.6.32-4-xen-amd64 on a 2.6.26-2-xen-amd64 (lenny) dom0,
it gets stuck at:
[0.120653] XENBUS: Device with no driver: device/vbd/769
[0.120658] XENBUS: Device with no driver: device/vif/0
[0.120663] XENBUS: Device with no driver: device/console/0
[0.120679]
/b
23 matches
Mail list logo
