On Wed, 2003-11-12 at 01:16, Anne Wilson wrote:
> On Wednesday 12 Nov 2003 7:32 am, Mofeed Shahin wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 12 Nov 2003 12:23 am, Mof wrote:
> > >> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 09:47 am, James Sparenberg wrote:
> > >> > On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 12:43, Anne Wilson wrote:
> > >> > > On Tuesday 11
On Wed, 12 Nov 2003, Anne Wilson wrote:
> > /dev/hda7 which is 1G
> >
> > /dev/hda5 is my real swap partition.
> >
> OK. Now have you checked that the suspend is now trying for hda7?
> And (sorry if this is insulting, it's not meant to be, but we all
> forget the obvious sometimes) there is a
On Wednesday 12 Nov 2003 7:32 am, Mofeed Shahin wrote:
> > On Wednesday 12 Nov 2003 12:23 am, Mof wrote:
> >> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 09:47 am, James Sparenberg wrote:
> >> > On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 12:43, Anne Wilson wrote:
> >> > > On Tuesday 11 Nov 2003 2:37 pm, Jack Coates wrote:
> >> > > > With the
> On Wednesday 12 Nov 2003 12:23 am, Mof wrote:
>> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 09:47 am, James Sparenberg wrote:
>> > On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 12:43, Anne Wilson wrote:
>> > > On Tuesday 11 Nov 2003 2:37 pm, Jack Coates wrote:
>> > > > With the extra information of not attempting resume allowing it
>> to boot
> On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 16:19, Mof wrote:
>> /var/log/messages > somefilename.txt Then close the lid. and see
>> if it gives you any useful info.
>>
>> I tried this but there is nothing showing up in /var/log/messages.
>>
>> Mof.
>
> What this indicates is that ACPI is doing what it thinks it's
On Wednesday 12 Nov 2003 12:23 am, Mof wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 09:47 am, James Sparenberg wrote:
> > On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 12:43, Anne Wilson wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 11 Nov 2003 2:37 pm, Jack Coates wrote:
> > > > With the extra information of not attempting resume allowing
> > > > it to boot,
On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 16:19, Mof wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 05:44 am, James Sparenberg wrote:
> > On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 05:53, Mof wrote:
> > > On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 04:59 pm, James Sparenberg wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 2003-11-10 at 22:02, Mof wrote:
> > > > > The "rpm -e -nodeps suspend-scripts" didn
On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 09:47 am, James Sparenberg wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 12:43, Anne Wilson wrote:
> > On Tuesday 11 Nov 2003 2:37 pm, Jack Coates wrote:
> > > With the extra information of not attempting resume allowing it to
> > > boot, I'll wager that your swap contains a corrupted system i
On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 05:44 am, James Sparenberg wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 05:53, Mof wrote:
> > On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 04:59 pm, James Sparenberg wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2003-11-10 at 22:02, Mof wrote:
> > > > The "rpm -e -nodeps suspend-scripts" didn't work, so it became
> > > > obvious that it was
On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 12:43, Anne Wilson wrote:
> On Tuesday 11 Nov 2003 2:37 pm, Jack Coates wrote:
> >
> > With the extra information of not attempting resume allowing it to
> > boot, I'll wager that your swap contains a corrupted system image
> > and is unusable as swap. free will show you no sw
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tuesday 11 November 2003 1:43 pm, Anne Wilson wrote:
> On Tuesday 11 Nov 2003 2:37 pm, Jack Coates wrote:
> > With the extra information of not attempting resume allowing it to
> > boot, I'll wager that your swap contains a corrupted system image
> > a
On Tuesday 11 Nov 2003 2:37 pm, Jack Coates wrote:
>
> With the extra information of not attempting resume allowing it to
> boot, I'll wager that your swap contains a corrupted system image
> and is unusable as swap. free will show you no swap available.
> swapoff, format /dev/hda5, swapon.
>
If yo
On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 05:53, Mof wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 04:59 pm, James Sparenberg wrote:
> > On Mon, 2003-11-10 at 22:02, Mof wrote:
> > > The "rpm -e -nodeps suspend-scripts" didn't work, so it became obvious
> > > that it was a kernel problem, so I thought I'd upgrade to the latest
> > > k
On Mon, 2003-11-10 at 22:02, Mof wrote:
> The "rpm -e -nodeps suspend-scripts" didn't work, so it became obvious that it
> was a kernel problem, so I thought I'd upgrade to the latest kernel, and see
> what happens, but as I was doing that I noticed something odd in lilo.conf :
>
> append="quiet
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 04:59 pm, James Sparenberg wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-11-10 at 22:02, Mof wrote:
> > The "rpm -e -nodeps suspend-scripts" didn't work, so it became obvious
> > that it was a kernel problem, so I thought I'd upgrade to the latest
> > kernel, and see what happens, but as I was doing th
Done, but since I've not ever used TWiki before, you may want to check that I
did it right :-)
Mof.
On Tuesday 11 November 2003 18:13, Anne Wilson wrote:
> Mof, could you put that on the TWiki? If you go to
> http://mandrake.vmlinuz.ca/bin/view/Main/HardwareIssues and click on
> the '?' after L
On Tuesday 11 Nov 2003 6:02 am, Mof wrote:
> The "rpm -e -nodeps suspend-scripts" didn't work, so it became
> obvious that it was a kernel problem, so I thought I'd upgrade to
> the latest kernel, and see what happens, but as I was doing that I
> noticed something odd in lilo.conf :
>
> append="qui
On Mon, 2003-11-10 at 22:02, Mof wrote:
> The "rpm -e -nodeps suspend-scripts" didn't work, so it became obvious that it
> was a kernel problem, so I thought I'd upgrade to the latest kernel, and see
> what happens, but as I was doing that I noticed something odd in lilo.conf :
>
> append="quiet
The "rpm -e -nodeps suspend-scripts" didn't work, so it became obvious that it
was a kernel problem, so I thought I'd upgrade to the latest kernel, and see
what happens, but as I was doing that I noticed something odd in lilo.conf :
append="quiet devfs=mount hdb=ide-scsi acpi=ht resume=/dev/hda5
try rpm -e --nodeps suspend-scripts.
On Sun, 2003-11-09 at 21:45, Mofeed Shahin wrote:
> > reply-to still a problem.>
>
> Yeah must be something I've done with kmail.
>
> > On Sat, 2003-11-08 at 23:56, Mof wrote:
> >> On Sun, 9 Nov 2003 05:28 pm, James Sparenberg wrote:
> >> > On Sat, 2003-11-08
> reply-to still a problem.>
Yeah must be something I've done with kmail.
> On Sat, 2003-11-08 at 23:56, Mof wrote:
>> On Sun, 9 Nov 2003 05:28 pm, James Sparenberg wrote:
>> > On Sat, 2003-11-08 at 16:44, Mof wrote:
>> > > It appears that acpi and apm do the same thing, which is the
>> prefered
reply-to still a problem.
On Sat, 2003-11-08 at 23:56, Mof wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Nov 2003 05:28 pm, James Sparenberg wrote:
> > On Sat, 2003-11-08 at 16:44, Mof wrote:
> > > It appears that acpi and apm do the same thing, which is the prefered one
> > > to use anyway ?
> > >
> > > And if acpi is the
On Sun, 9 Nov 2003 05:28 pm, James Sparenberg wrote:
> On Sat, 2003-11-08 at 16:44, Mof wrote:
> > It appears that acpi and apm do the same thing, which is the prefered one
> > to use anyway ?
> >
> > And if acpi is the prefered, how do I load up the right modules ?
> >
> > Mof.
>
> This order of c
On Sat, 2003-11-08 at 22:54, James Sparenberg wrote:
> On Sat, 2003-11-08 at 22:54, Jack Coates wrote:
> > On Sat, 2003-11-08 at 15:27, Stew Benedict wrote:
> > > On Sat, 8 Nov 2003, Jack Coates wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sat, 2003-11-08 at 06:57, Jack Coates wrote:
> > > > > edit /etc/acpi/events/li
On Sat, 2003-11-08 at 14:22, James Sparenberg wrote:
> On Sat, 2003-11-08 at 08:28, Jack Coates wrote:
> > 1st: http://www.monkeynoodle.org/comp/reply-to
> >
> > check /var/log/acpid... I just checked mine and found something spooky,
> > which is that it's still trying to execute /usr/sbin/pmsuspe
On Sat, 2003-11-08 at 22:54, Jack Coates wrote:
> On Sat, 2003-11-08 at 15:27, Stew Benedict wrote:
> > On Sat, 8 Nov 2003, Jack Coates wrote:
> >
> > > On Sat, 2003-11-08 at 06:57, Jack Coates wrote:
> > > > edit /etc/acpi/events/lid and comment out action=/usr/sbin/pmsuspend
> > > >
> > > > ACP
On Sat, 2003-11-08 at 16:44, Mof wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Nov 2003 02:58 am, Jack Coates wrote:
> > 1st: http://www.monkeynoodle.org/comp/reply-to
>
> huh ?? (page times out)
sorry, a power line snapped on our street and power's been out for
thirteen hours. That page explains why setting your reply-to
On Sat, 2003-11-08 at 15:27, Stew Benedict wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Nov 2003, Jack Coates wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 2003-11-08 at 06:57, Jack Coates wrote:
> > > edit /etc/acpi/events/lid and comment out action=/usr/sbin/pmsuspend
> > >
> > > ACPI is attempting to trigger swsusp suspend-to-disk, which basic
On Sun, 9 Nov 2003 02:58 am, Jack Coates wrote:
> 1st: http://www.monkeynoodle.org/comp/reply-to
huh ?? (page times out)
> check /var/log/acpid... I just checked mine and found something spooky,
> which is that it's still trying to execute /usr/sbin/pmsuspend and just
> failing because the file w
On Sat, 8 Nov 2003, Jack Coates wrote:
> On Sat, 2003-11-08 at 06:57, Jack Coates wrote:
> > edit /etc/acpi/events/lid and comment out action=/usr/sbin/pmsuspend
> >
> > ACPI is attempting to trigger swsusp suspend-to-disk, which basically
> > doesn't work on modern laptops.
> ...
>
> that's ac
On Sat, 2003-11-08 at 08:28, Jack Coates wrote:
> 1st: http://www.monkeynoodle.org/comp/reply-to
>
> check /var/log/acpid... I just checked mine and found something spooky,
> which is that it's still trying to execute /usr/sbin/pmsuspend and just
> failing because the file was renamed /usr/sbin/pm
1st: http://www.monkeynoodle.org/comp/reply-to
check /var/log/acpid... I just checked mine and found something spooky,
which is that it's still trying to execute /usr/sbin/pmsuspend and just
failing because the file was renamed /usr/sbin/pmsuspend2 (which also
doesn't work to suspend the laptop).
I just tried that, and it still locks up.
Mof.
On Sun, 9 Nov 2003 01:27 am, Jack Coates wrote:
> edit /etc/acpi/events/lid and comment out action=/usr/sbin/pmsuspend
>
> ACPI is attempting to trigger swsusp suspend-to-disk, which basically
> doesn't work on modern laptops.
>
> On Fri, 2003-11-07
On Sat, 2003-11-08 at 06:57, Jack Coates wrote:
> edit /etc/acpi/events/lid and comment out action=/usr/sbin/pmsuspend
>
> ACPI is attempting to trigger swsusp suspend-to-disk, which basically
> doesn't work on modern laptops.
...
that's actually not a fair comment, I should actually state that i
edit /etc/acpi/events/lid and comment out action=/usr/sbin/pmsuspend
ACPI is attempting to trigger swsusp suspend-to-disk, which basically
doesn't work on modern laptops.
On Fri, 2003-11-07 at 21:43, Mofeed Shahin wrote:
> G'day all,
>
> I've just put 9.2 onto my Dell inspiron 8200, which is a I
On Saturday 08 November 2003, Greg Meyer wrote:
>On Saturday 08 November 2003 08:05 am, Bryan Phinney wrote:
>> On Saturday 08 November 2003 12:43 am, Mofeed Shahin wrote:
>> > G'day all,
>> >
>> > I've just put 9.2 onto my Dell inspiron 8200, which is a Intel 2.2 Mobile
>> > chip, and ati radeon v
On Saturday 08 November 2003 08:05 am, Bryan Phinney wrote:
> On Saturday 08 November 2003 12:43 am, Mofeed Shahin wrote:
> > G'day all,
> >
> > I've just put 9.2 onto my Dell inspiron 8200, which is a Intel 2.2 Mobile
> > chip, and ati radeon video.
> >
> > As soon as the lid is closed the the mac
On Saturday 08 November 2003, Bryan Phinney wrote:
>On Saturday 08 November 2003 12:43 am, Mofeed Shahin wrote:
>> G'day all,
>>
>> I've just put 9.2 onto my Dell inspiron 8200, which is a Intel 2.2 Mobile
>> chip, and ati radeon video.
>>
>> As soon as the lid is closed the the machine has a compl
On Saturday 08 November 2003 12:43 am, Mofeed Shahin wrote:
> G'day all,
>
> I've just put 9.2 onto my Dell inspiron 8200, which is a Intel 2.2 Mobile
> chip, and ati radeon video.
>
> As soon as the lid is closed the the machine has a complete lock up. ie no
> keyboard, no mouse, and no screen upd
G'day all,
I've just put 9.2 onto my Dell inspiron 8200, which is a Intel 2.2 Mobile
chip, and ati radeon video.
As soon as the lid is closed the the machine has a complete lock up. ie no
keyboard, no mouse, and no screen updates
I just tried upgrading the kernel to kernel-2.4.22.21mdk-1-1md
40 matches
Mail list logo
