Bug#1058758: Bug not fixed in 6.1.69-1

Hi I'm running kernel 6.1.69-1 on Debian 12 stable and this bug is still there. Thanks Kris

Bug#1058758: Still not fixed for ThinkPad Compact USB Keyboard with TrackPoint (not II)

Dear developers, Unfortunately, after upgrading kernel to 6.6.8 on my Sid desktop (at home), I still witness the bug (middle click performed when releasing middle button after wheel emulation) with my ThinkPad Compact USB Keyboard with TrackPoint (old model, not II). Those spurious clicks ar

Bug#956226: Not fixed in Debian 12 D-I as of 2024-12-01

Hi, I still found this bug with the installer shipped in Bookworm. I'm using the image debian-live-12.2.0-amd64-gnome.iso, and I also had a LVM-Thin Physical Volume previously created by a Proxmox-VE installer ISO, which could not be removed by the Debian Installer. Thanks for working on that! B

Bug#956226: Not fixed in Debian 12 D-I Alpha2 as of 2023-03-16

Dear all, This sitation also arises in the latest Debian Instaler (Netinst ISO) for Debian 12 available in Testing. LVM-Thin Physical Volume previously created by a Proxmox-VE installer ISO cannot be removed by the Debian Installer. Normal LVM (non-thin) PV also created by the same Proxmox Insta

Bug#925496: Introduced between v4.18 and v4.19, not fixed in v5.0

I've tested some other kernel versions. In the description below, "fast" means that the NFS clients booted quickly (~20s) whereas "slow" means that the NFS clients booted slowly (~100s). In all cases, rx-usecs=200, rx-frames=4. Debian versions: v4.18.0-3-amd64: fast (not tested recently) v4.19.0

Bug#875621: Still not fixed

As an additional data point, in case it's of any help, I can add that I also have problems due to CONFIG_RMI4_SMB being disabled. I'm using a Thinkpad X1 Carbon 6th generation machine. I have rebuilt my kernel with CONFIG_RMI4_SMB enabled and everything is fine. If there are still machines t

Bug#875621: Still not fixed

On Fri, 2018-09-14 at 09:16 +0200, Han Boetes wrote: > > > > Source: linux > > Source-Version: 4.13.10-1 > > We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of > > linux, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive. > > > Dear maintainer, > > With every new kernel

Bug#905966: linux-image-4.9.0-0.bpo.7-amd64: CVE-2018-5390 not fixed?

Package: src:linux Version: 4.9.110-1~deb8u1 Severity: grave Tags: newcomer Dear Maintainer, On august 6th DSA-4266-1 linux was announced (https://www.debian.org/security/2018/dsa-4266.en.html). However, source package linux-4.9 (debian oldstable, jessie) is not included in the overview for CVE-2

Bug#765953: Wifi issues. Firmware package not fixed in testing release

Am 10.06.2015 um 19:10 schrieb Acommon LinuxUser: > Hi, > I submitted a bug about 8 months ago, but I didn't receive any reply. I > updated my Debian system to the testing release ("stretch") because a > new version of the firmware-realtek package has been released for it, > but it didn't solve the

Bug#765953: Wifi issues. Firmware package not fixed in testing release

On Wed, 2015-06-10 at 19:10 +0200, Acommon LinuxUser wrote: > Hi, > I submitted a bug about 8 months ago, but I didn't receive any reply. I > updated my Debian system to the testing release ("stretch") because a > new version of the firmware-realtek package has been released for it, > but it did

Bug#776409: —Bug#767832— not fixed in cryptsetup 2:1.6.6-4 nor 2:1.6.6-5

On Wed, 25 Mar 2015 12:27:25 +0100 Marc Ballarin wrote: > Hi, > > we have most likely observed the same, or a very similar, bug when > upgrading two test systems from Wheezy to Jessie. [...] > Modifying fstab like this fixes things (all other filesystems continue > to use LABEL): > ... > /dev/map

Bug#776409: —Bug#767832— not fixed in cryptsetup 2:1.6.6-4 nor 2:1.6.6-5

Hi, we have most likely observed the same, or a very similar, bug when upgrading two test systems from Wheezy to Jessie. Important: We use LVM for everything but / and /boot. The default fstab looks like this: LABEL=boot /boot ext3 defaults,errors=remount-ro,noatime

Bug#776409: —Bug#767832— not fixed in cryptsetup 2:1.6.6-4 nor 2:1.6.6-5

Hi, Sorry, I forgot to reinstall the latest version. See below the output the 0.119 version (the problem remains). zero@debian:~$ *dpkg -l |grep -i initramfs-tools* ii initramfs-tools 0.119 all generic modular initramfs generator *lsinitramfs /boot/in

Bug#776409: —Bug#767832— not fixed in cryptsetup 2:1.6.6-4 nor 2:1.6.6-5

On Wed, 2015-03-11 at 19:11 +0100, zer0 divide wrote: > Hi, > > here the outputs : > > zero@debian:~$ lsinitramfs /boot/initrd.img-$(uname -r) > /boot/initrd.img-3.16.0-4-amd64 > lsinitramfs does not yet support cpio archive initramfs files. > See http://bugs.debian.org/717805 for more informatio

Bug#776409: —Bug#767832— not fixed in cryptsetup 2:1.6.6-4 nor 2:1.6.6-5

Hi, here the outputs : zero@debian:~$ *lsinitramfs /boot/initrd.img-$(uname -r)* /boot/initrd.img-3.16.0-4-amd64 lsinitramfs does not yet support cpio archive initramfs files. See http://bugs.debian.org/717805 for more information. *Fstab* zero@debian:~$ *cat /etc/fstab* # /etc/fstab: static f

Processed: Re: —Bug#767832— not fixed in cryptsetup 2:1.6.6-4 nor 2:1.6.6-5

Processing control commands: > tag -1 unreproducible moreinfo Bug #776409 [initramfs-tools] Decryption problem with split /usr - cryptsetup/initramfs-tools Added tag(s) unreproducible and moreinfo. -- 776409: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=776409 Debian Bug Tracking System Con

Bug#776409: —Bug#767832— not fixed in cryptsetup 2:1.6.6-4 nor 2:1.6.6-5

Control: tag -1 unreproducible moreinfo On Tue, 27 Jan 2015 19:48:48 +0100 zer0 divide wrote: > Package: initramfs-tools > Version: 0.118_all > Severity: Critical > > Hi, > > Unfortunately, the 767832 bug still relevant with : > > * cryptsetup 2:1.6.6-5amd64 > * initramfs-tools 0.

Bug#776409: —Bug#767832— not fixed in cryptsetup 2:1.6.6-4 nor 2:1.6.6-5

Package: initramfs-tools Version: 0.118_all Severity: Critical Hi, Unfortunately, the 767832 bug still relevant with : * cryptsetup 2:1.6.6-5amd64 * initramfs-tools 0.118 My system does not start automatically after entering the password for unlocking the root partition. I have to

Bug#748398: 3.16.5-1 not fixed the problem

I've installed the newest testing on powerbook g4 5,6. After upgrade to 3.16-3 the string (II) [KMS] drm report modesetting isn't supported stayed in Xorg.0.log. After video=radeonfb:off kernel config string kms seems start working, but hangs everythin after a short time of use. -- WBR, Vladim

Bug#713943: Not fixed for me

H... I'm planning to try it on my G5 soon. I'll let you know what I find out. It may be that we need a parameter on the module load line? Rick On Apr 22, 2014, at 1:10 AM, Bertrand Dekoninck wrote: > Hi Rick, for you so much for your quick answer. > I had tried the same in /etc/modules.

Bug#713943: Not fixed for me

Hi Rick, for you so much for your quick answer. I had tried the same in /etc/modules. I've just removed it and tried your local.conf setting. No success. I have still the same message in dmesg : " [0.961200] PowerMac i2c bus pmu 2 registered [0.961236] PowerMac i2c bus pmu 1 registered

Bug#713943: Not fixed for me

On Apr 21, 2014, at 1:49 PM, Bertrand Dekoninck wrote: > I've installed jessie with linux-3.13.7-1 last night on my powermac7,3 (2x2.0 > ghz). The fans are still crazy, even if i2c-powermac is build-in (and not a > module anymore). Hi Bertrand, Have you tried echo 'i2c-powermac' > /etc/m

Bug#713943: Not fixed for me

I've installed jessie with linux-3.13.7-1 last night on my powermac7,3 (2x2.0 ghz). The fans are still crazy, even if i2c-powermac is build-in (and not a module anymore). I see the following messages in dmesg : [0.961733] i2c i2c-3: i2c-powermac: modalias failure on /u3@0,f800/i2c@f800

Bug#582975: backports: not fixed

Hi Jonathan, > Please file a separate bug. Sorry. I've filed #669313. Greetings, Georg -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c061cdaa918a5d1e9375adf0d

Bug#582975: backports: not fixed

Hi Georg, ge...@riseup.net wrote: > I've installed yesterday a Dell Dimension 2400 with Debian Squeeze. > Experienced the same problem, upgraded to > > - linux-image-686-pae 3.2+44~bpo60+1 > - libdrm-intel1 2.4.26-1~bpo60+1. > > However, the problem still occurs. > Any advice someone? Please fil

Bug#582975: backports: not fixed

Hi all, I've installed yesterday a Dell Dimension 2400 with Debian Squeeze. Experienced the same problem, upgraded to - linux-image-686-pae 3.2+44~bpo60+1 - libdrm-intel1 2.4.26-1~bpo60+1. However, the problem still occurs. Any advice someone? Thanks, Georg -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debia

Bug#622259: Not fixed in 2.6.32-34 Squeeze version

Hello, I've tried the 2.6.32-34 Debian kernel recently released for Squeeze, and the bug is still present. Fred. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.deb

Bug#584273: not fixed in version in experimental

On Sat, 2010-12-11 at 14:10 +0200, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote: > the fix isn't applied in 2.6.36 (and maybe 2.6.37) Well, the fix is really a workaround: we don't load the driver automatically. Please report the bug upstream at under product 'Drivers', component 'Oth

Bug#584273: not fixed in version in experimental

the fix isn't applied in 2.6.36 (and maybe 2.6.37) -- blog: http://tshepang.tumblr.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/aanlkti=926dlsoy5gf5709dfyv

Bug#518182: e1000: Detected Tx Unit Hang in 2.6.32-27: not fixed? regression?

Hi, I just did a fresh install of Squeeze (using the Beta1 d-i, amd64). I encountered this bug using 2.6.32-27, although the bug was allegedly fixed in 2.6.32-25. My machine has exactly 4 GB of RAM and an AMD 64 X2 5200+ CPU. Additional details follow. Thanks, Neal Desired=Unknown/Install/Remo

Bug#581554: Not fixed

On Sun, 2010-07-18 at 06:47 +0100, John Talbut wrote: > I do not think this can be considered fixed yet. It is still a problem > for me in the latest version and it seems still to be not working for > others. What reason do you have for thinking that this is a problem with the *firmware* and no

Bug#581554: Not fixed

I do not think this can be considered fixed yet. It is still a problem for me in the latest version and it seems still to be not working for others. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.or

Bug#535450: Problem not fixed

reopen 535450 thanks I would ask you to ask me before closing this bug. Absence of the machine is not a fix for the bug. I'm getting another Debian on another ThinkPad soon. I'll leave the bug open for a while. Cheers, Sasha. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org

Processed: Problem not fixed

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > reopen 535450 Bug #535450 {Done: Moritz Muehlenhoff } [linux-image-2.6.26-2-686] Booting sometimes stops at T42p > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 535450: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cg

Bug#545728: still not fixed?

On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 11:50:36PM +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: > On Thu, 2010-04-08 at 17:50 +0200, maximilian attems wrote: > > you do not *need*, only if you want to use one of it's function. > > that is pretty straight forward shell scripting. > > that is not what this bug was about.

Bug#545728: still not fixed?

On Thu, 2010-04-08 at 17:50 +0200, maximilian attems wrote: > you do not *need*, only if you want to use one of it's function. > that is pretty straight forward shell scripting. > that is not what this bug was about. Of course,.. but I thought it would make sense to mention it in the section which

Bug#545728: still not fixed?

On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 11:41:09AM +, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: > reopen 545728 > stop > > Hi. > > I might be wrong, but can it be that this is still not fixed? > > 1) The manpage section "BOOT SCRIPTS / Help functions" does not mention > that yo

Processed: still not fixed?

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > reopen 545728 Bug #545728 {Done: maximilian attems } [initramfs-tools] initramfs-tools(8) missing import instruction in boot script example 'reopen' may be inappropriate when a bug has been closed with a version; you may need to use 'found' to re

Bug#545728: still not fixed?

reopen 545728 stop Hi. I might be wrong, but can it be that this is still not fixed? 1) The manpage section "BOOT SCRIPTS / Help functions" does not mention that you need to source /usr/share/initramfs-tools/scripts/functions nor does the "Header" section right above. 2)

Bug#550562: Problem not fixed in linux-2.6 2.6.32-9 - system keeps freezing with OpenGL

Hi I'd like to inform that in my side, latest version of linux-2.6 didn't solve the problem. System keeps freezing randomly when I'm using openGL applications. As far as I understood, you worked mainly on the kernel and the firmware-linux paquets. In my opinion, the problem is more xorg-co

Bug#528362: linux-image-2.6.32-trunk-686: Not fixed in 2.6.32

On Fri, 2009-12-18 at 09:42 +0100, Victor Pablos Ceruelo wrote: > There is a similar bug at bugzilla: > > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14709 > > Maybe those times that my machine hangs is due to r8169 too, > but I'm not able to get any log when this happens. That bug report now se

Bug#528362: linux-image-2.6.32-trunk-686: Not fixed in 2.6.32

ruelo wrote: Package: linux-2.6 Version: 2.6.32-1 Followup-For: Bug #528362 Sorry Ben, it is still not fixed in 2.6.32-1. Kerneloops submission: http://www.kerneloops.org/submitresult.php?number=1031676 I removed pci=nomsi, maybe I should try it again ... OK, please report this upstre

Bug#528362: linux-image-2.6.32-trunk-686: Not fixed in 2.6.32

On Thu, 2009-12-17 at 13:55 +0100, Victor Pablos Ceruelo wrote: > Package: linux-2.6 > Version: 2.6.32-1 > Followup-For: Bug #528362 > > > Sorry Ben, it is still not fixed in 2.6.32-1. > Kerneloops submission: > http://www.kerneloops.org/submitresult.php?number=1031676

Bug#528362: linux-image-2.6.32-trunk-686: Not fixed in 2.6.32

Package: linux-2.6 Version: 2.6.32-1 Followup-For: Bug #528362 Sorry Ben, it is still not fixed in 2.6.32-1. Kerneloops submission: http://www.kerneloops.org/submitresult.php?number=1031676 I removed pci=nomsi, maybe I should try it again ... Thanks, Victor. -- Package-specific info

Bug#527926: Not fixed in trunk

This bug also applies to linux-image-2.6.30-rc4-amd64_2.6.30~rc4-1~experimental.1~snapshot.13587_i386.deb However, on my Gentoo system, I can run tcpdump just fine even with a self-compiled 64-bit kernel and 32-bit userspace -- Alexander E. Patrakov -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-

Bug#517241: Not fixed in 2.6.29 :)

tag 517241 - fixed-upstream thanks Actually, that's not quite correct. Althogh inserting the headphones correctly mutes the speakers, if I mute and unmute the Master channel while headphones are plugged in, the laptop's speakers return to life. The volume-related weirdness does seem to be fixed t

Bug#508108: Reopening, bug not fixed in 2.6.26-12

On Mon, Jan 05, 2009 at 02:43:24PM -0700, dann frazier wrote: > > Thanks Jurij. Can you try one of these? > http://people.debian.org/~dannf/bugs/508108/ I have just reinstalled my box (SunBlade 1000) using the daily d-i build and installed linux-image-2.6.26-1-sparc64-smp_2.6.26-13~testfix.50

Bug#508108: Reopening, bug not fixed in 2.6.26-12

On Mon, Jan 05, 2009 at 08:37:28PM +, Jurij Smakov wrote: > On Mon, Jan 05, 2009 at 10:41:54AM -0700, dann frazier wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 05, 2009 at 07:01:17AM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote: > > > Quoting Jurij Smakov (ju...@wooyd.org): > > > > > > > Please enable them for the next upload (w

Bug#508108: Reopening, bug not fixed in 2.6.26-12

On Mon, Jan 05, 2009 at 10:41:54AM -0700, dann frazier wrote: > On Mon, Jan 05, 2009 at 07:01:17AM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote: > > Quoting Jurij Smakov (ju...@wooyd.org): > > > > > Please enable them for the next upload (which will hopefully make it > > > into lenny). > > > > > > If we want

Bug#508108: Reopening, bug not fixed in 2.6.26-12

On Mon, Jan 05, 2009 at 07:01:17AM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote: > Quoting Jurij Smakov (ju...@wooyd.org): > > > Please enable them for the next upload (which will hopefully make it > > into lenny). > > > If we want to release lenny some day, maybe not. D-I RC2 was delayed > partly because of

Bug#508108: Reopening, bug not fixed in 2.6.26-12

Quoting Jurij Smakov (ju...@wooyd.org): > Please enable them for the next upload (which will hopefully make it > into lenny). If we want to release lenny some day, maybe not. D-I RC2 was delayed partly because of -12. Now that everything is in place for a release to happen (including the D-I RM

Bug#508108: Reopening, bug not fixed in 2.6.26-12

found 2.6.26-12 thanks Hi, Contrary to what 2.6.26-12 changelog says, the Sparc XVR framebuffer drivers (CONFIG_FB_XVR500, CONFIG_FB_XVR2500) were NOT enabled in it: ju...@droopy:~/tmp$ dpkg -x linux-image-2.6.26-1-sparc64-smp_2.6.26-12_sparc.deb tmp ju...@droopy:~/tmp$ grep -i xvr tmp/boot/co

Re: Bug#499366: "4gb seg fixup" not fixed in 2.7-14?

On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 14:45:21 +0200 Ferenc Wagner wrote: > xen-linux-system-2.6.26-1-xen-686 from unstable doesn't boot for me > either. Should it? It actually does, I was misguided by the hvc vs xvc vs serial console flow control issues. Unfortunately qla2xxx is still broken, but that belon

Re: Bug#499366: "4gb seg fixup" not fixed in 2.7-14?

On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 12:19:49 +0200 Bastian Blank wrote: > On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 08:55:01AM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > >> Given how Xen works, a lot of people are not able to change their >> kernel. > > This is incorrect. There are now two possibilities to use the guest > supplied kernels

Processed: not fixed

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reopen 415095 Bug#415095: linux-kernel-headers: please revert addition of typedef for __kernel_dev_t in linux/types.h 'reopen' may be inappropriate when a bug has been closed with a version; you may need to use 'found' to remove fixed versions. Bug reo

Bug#415095: not fixed

reopen 415095 thanks not fixed Bastian -- Knowledge, sir, should be free to all! -- Harry Mudd, "I, Mudd", stardate 4513.3 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Processed (with 2 errors): not fixed in 2.6.20

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reassign 420241 quota Bug#420241: quota: error while getting quota: Success Bug reassigned from package `linux-2.6' to `quota'. > found 3.14-7 Unknown command or malformed arguments to command. > closed 3.15-4 Unknown command or malformed arguments to

Bug#420241: not fixed in 2.6.20

reassign 420241 quota found 3.14-7 closed 3.15-4 thanks > Edquota segfaults, quota command results: > > # quota -u 1500 > quota: error while getting quota from /dev/sda7 for #1500 (id 1500): > Success Bastian Blank wrote: > Fixed in 2.6.20, not fixed in 2.6.18. I'm afra

Bug#433187: 433187: not fixed completely

Hi, after applying 179c85ea53bef807621f335767e41e23f86f01df building packages using libc6 from Lenny is possible again, but there's still a broken behaviour: >From stracing aptitude: libc6 from Etch: 2129 write(1, "\rBuilding tag database... Done\r", 31) = 31 2129 write(1, "\n", 1)

Processed: Not fixed

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reopen 335264 Bug#335264: yaird fails with older (titanium) powerbooks. Bug reopened, originator not changed. > kthxbye Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debia

Bug#319657: Reopening, as bug is not fixed yet

reopen 319657 tag 319657 pending thanks This bug is not fixed in the kernel images until we do a new kernel upload, rebuilding the kernels against fixed kernel-package. Reopening for now. Jurij Smakov[EMAIL PROTECTED] Key: http://www.wooyd.org/pgpkey

Processed: Reopening, as bug is not fixed yet

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reopen 319657 Bug#319657: linux-image-2.6.12-1-686: /vmlinuz and /initrd symlinks were botched after installing 2.6.12 Bug reopened, originator not changed. > tag 319657 pending Bug#319657: linux-image-2.6.12-1-686: /vmlinuz and /initrd symlinks were

Processed: not fixed

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reopen 297481 Bug#297481: hotplug: Fails to load firmware for ipw2200 after upgrade Bug#297686: udev 0.054-1 fails to load firmware Bug#298397: udevsend breaks firmware downloading Bug#298908: udev 0.054-1 and above break ipw2200 module Bug#298950: /sbi

not fixed

reopen 297481 thanks The bug still exists and you should not close it unless the debian-kernel team will say that they are not going to fix it. -- ciao, Marco -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Processed: bug not fixed

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reopen 287561 Bug#287561: kernel-image-2.6.8-1-686: kernel BUG at mm/prio_tree.c:333! Bug reopened, originator not changed. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (adminis

Processed: bug not fixed

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reopen 287561 Bug#287561: kernel-image-2.6.8-1-686: kernel BUG at mm/prio_tree.c:333! Bug reopened, originator not changed. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (adminis

Bug#291846: marked as done (Bugs not fixed from 2.6.8)

Your message dated Mon, 24 Jan 2005 21:36:46 -0800 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bugs not fixed from 2.6.8 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 no

Bug#291845: marked as done (Bugs not fixed from 2.6.8)

Your message dated Sun, 23 Jan 2005 19:18:07 -0800 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bugs not fixed from 2.6.8 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 no

Bug#291846: Bugs not fixed from 2.6.8

Peter, These bugs have not been lost; there's really no reason to open new release critical bugs just to point at release critical bugs that are already open. If anything, the bugs open against the -1 kernel images probably need to be reassigned to the -2 kernel images, but it should be confirmed

Bug#291845: Bugs not fixed from 2.6.8

800 is still not fixed and you shouldn't go out with this 2.6.8. In Kernel 2.6.10 this bug is fixed. Peter -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#291846: Bugs not fixed from 2.6.8

bug #282800 is still not fixed and you shouldn't go out with this 2.6.8. In Kernel 2.6.10 this bug is fixed. Peter -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Bug #266882 still not fixed

On Mon, Jan 03, 2005 at 03:25:41PM -0800, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 11:27:58AM +0900, Horms wrote: > > > On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 12:59:24AM +0100, Tomasz Malesinski wrote: > > > Why hasn't the bug #266882 (CAN-2004-0554 i387.h in kernel: asm > > > volatile("fnclex ; fwait");)

Re: Bug #266882 still not fixed

Horms wrote: > On Mon, Jan 03, 2005 at 03:25:41PM -0800, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 11:27:58AM +0900, Horms wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 12:59:24AM +0100, Tomasz Malesinski wrote: > > > > Why hasn't the bug #266882 (CAN-2004-0554 i387.h in kernel: asm > > > > vol

Re: Bug #266882 still not fixed

On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 11:41:51AM +0900, Horms wrote: > Understood. Would it be helpful if security patches for the 2.4 kernel > were forwarded to the security-team as they are added to SVN for > inclusion in unstable and thus testing? Yes, absolutely. > Perhaps being better about opening entri

Re: Bug #266882 still not fixed

On Mon, Jan 03, 2005 at 03:25:41PM -0800, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 11:27:58AM +0900, Horms wrote: > > > On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 12:59:24AM +0100, Tomasz Malesinski wrote: > > > Why hasn't the bug #266882 (CAN-2004-0554 i387.h in kernel: asm > > > volatile("fnclex ; fwait");)

Re: Bug #266882 still not fixed

On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 11:27:58AM +0900, Horms wrote: > On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 12:59:24AM +0100, Tomasz Malesinski wrote: > > Why hasn't the bug #266882 (CAN-2004-0554 i387.h in kernel: asm > > volatile("fnclex ; fwait");) has not been fixed in 2.4.18 for so long? > > That and a host of others.

Re: Bug #266882 still not fixed

On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 12:59:24AM +0100, Tomasz Malesinski wrote: > Why hasn't the bug #266882 (CAN-2004-0554 i387.h in kernel: asm > volatile("fnclex ; fwait");) has not been fixed in 2.4.18 for so long? That and a host of others. Security-Team, Is there ever going to be a new kernel for Woody?

Bug #266882 still not fixed

Why hasn't the bug #266882 (CAN-2004-0554 i387.h in kernel: asm volatile("fnclex ; fwait");) has not been fixed in 2.4.18 for so long? Tomasz Malesiński

Re: CAN-2004-0554 is not fixed

On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 03:05:25PM +0200, Norbert Tretkowski wrote: > * Horms wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 03, 2004 at 02:16:52PM +0200, Norbert Tretkowski wrote: > > > I just discovered that CAN-2004-0554 is still valid, at least for > > > kernel-image-2.4.26-1-686 2.4.26-4 from unstable. I tested it on

Re: CAN-2004-0554 is not fixed

* Horms wrote: > On Tue, Aug 03, 2004 at 02:16:52PM +0200, Norbert Tretkowski wrote: > > I just discovered that CAN-2004-0554 is still valid, at least for > > kernel-image-2.4.26-1-686 2.4.26-4 from unstable. I tested it on > > two machines, and both machines crashed when running crash.c. > > Than

Re: CAN-2004-0554 is not fixed

On Tue, Aug 03, 2004 at 03:17:49PM +0200, Jens Schmalzing wrote: > Hi, > > Norbert Tretkowski writes: > > > I just discovered that CAN-2004-0554 is still valid, at least for > > kernel-image-2.4.26-1-686 2.4.26-4 from unstable. I tested it on > > two machines, and both machines crashed when runn

Re: CAN-2004-0554 is not fixed

On Tue, Aug 03, 2004 at 02:16:52PM +0200, Norbert Tretkowski wrote: > Hi, > > I just discovered that CAN-2004-0554 is still valid, at least for > kernel-image-2.4.26-1-686 2.4.26-4 from unstable. I tested it on > two machines, and both machines crashed when running crash.c. Thanks, I will take an

Re: CAN-2004-0554 is not fixed

* Jens Schmalzing wrote: > Norbert Tretkowski writes: >> I just discovered that CAN-2004-0554 is still valid, at least for >> kernel-image-2.4.26-1-686 2.4.26-4 from unstable. I tested it on >> two machines, and both machines crashed when running crash.c. > > This is related to Bug#262540. In fact

Re: CAN-2004-0554 is not fixed

Hi, Norbert Tretkowski writes: > I just discovered that CAN-2004-0554 is still valid, at least for > kernel-image-2.4.26-1-686 2.4.26-4 from unstable. I tested it on > two machines, and both machines crashed when running crash.c. This is related to Bug#262540. In fact, patch-2.4.26-3 has not b

CAN-2004-0554 is not fixed

Hi, I just discovered that CAN-2004-0554 is still valid, at least for kernel-image-2.4.26-1-686 2.4.26-4 from unstable. I tested it on two machines, and both machines crashed when running crash.c. Norbert