On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 03:05:24PM +, Jan Beulich wrote:
> The change to force legacy mode IDE channels' resources to fixed
> non-zero values confuses (at least some versions of) X, because the
> values reported by the kernel and those readable from PCI config space
> aren't consistent
On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 03:05:24PM +, Jan Beulich wrote:
The change to force legacy mode IDE channels' resources to fixed
non-zero values confuses (at least some versions of) X, because the
values reported by the kernel and those readable from PCI config space
aren't consistent anymore.
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 06:49:39PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> >The one problem with noatime is that mutt's 'new mail arrived' breaks
>
> Just why does not it use mtime then to check for New Mail Arrived, like
I have always used:
--enable-buffy-sizeUse file size attribute instead
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 06:49:39PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
The one problem with noatime is that mutt's 'new mail arrived' breaks
Just why does not it use mtime then to check for New Mail Arrived, like
I have always used:
--enable-buffy-sizeUse file size attribute instead of
On Thu, Dec 28, 2006 at 11:00:46AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> And I have a test-program that shows the corruption _much_ easier (at
> least according to my own testing, and that of several reporters that back
> me up), and that seems to show the corruption going way way back (ie going
>
On Wed, Dec 27, 2006 at 07:04:34PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> [ Modified test-program that tells you where the corruption happens (and
> when the missing parts were supposed to be written out) appended, in
> case people care. ]
Hi
2.6.18 (and 2.6.18.6) is ok, 2.6.19-rc1 is broken. I
On Wed, Dec 27, 2006 at 07:04:34PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
[ Modified test-program that tells you where the corruption happens (and
when the missing parts were supposed to be written out) appended, in
case people care. ]
Hi
2.6.18 (and 2.6.18.6) is ok, 2.6.19-rc1 is broken. I tried
On Thu, Dec 28, 2006 at 11:00:46AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
And I have a test-program that shows the corruption _much_ easier (at
least according to my own testing, and that of several reporters that back
me up), and that seems to show the corruption going way way back (ie going
back to
On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 12:04:28PM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> Decoding the first few words to hex, then ASCII gives
> sts.pte_spinlock
> #define pgtable_cache_size (pgt_quicklists.pgtable_cache_sz)
> #define pgd_
>
> and I it continues. The defines are from include/asm-sparc/pgalloc.h
Got these in 2.4.0. Sorry if it's a known problem: I haven't been following
the list very closely. This is a 100 MHz pentium and the kernel was compiled
with gcc version egcs-2.91.66 19990314/Linux (egcs-1.1.2 release). After
booting to 2.2.latest.latest fsck did its fscking without telling
Got these in 2.4.0. Sorry if it's a known problem: I haven't been following
the list very closely. This is a 100 MHz pentium and the kernel was compiled
with gcc version egcs-2.91.66 19990314/Linux (egcs-1.1.2 release). After
booting to 2.2.latest.latest fsck did its fscking without telling
On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 12:04:28PM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote:
Decoding the first few words to hex, then ASCII gives
sts.pte_spinlock
#define pgtable_cache_size (pgt_quicklists.pgtable_cache_sz)
#define pgd_
and I it continues. The defines are from include/asm-sparc/pgalloc.h
and
On Fri, Jan 05, 2001 at 05:35:03PM +, Alan Cox wrote:
>
>
> o E820 handling fixup (Andrea Arcangeli)
I guess this was supposed to be partly backed out for 2.4 too:
--- linux-2.4.0/arch/i386/kernel/setup.c.orig Sun Dec 31 20:26:18 2000
+++
On Fri, Jan 05, 2001 at 05:35:03PM +, Alan Cox wrote:
o E820 handling fixup (Andrea Arcangeli)
I guess this was supposed to be partly backed out for 2.4 too:
--- linux-2.4.0/arch/i386/kernel/setup.c.orig Sun Dec 31 20:26:18 2000
+++
On Fri, Dec 22, 2000 at 12:52:32AM +, Alan Cox wrote:
>
> 2.2.19pre3
> o Fix e820 handling (Andrea Arcangeli)
arch/i386/kernel/setup.c:
/* compare results from other methods and take the greater */
if (ALT_MEM_K <
On Fri, Dec 22, 2000 at 12:52:32AM +, Alan Cox wrote:
>
> o Optimise kernel compiler detect, kgcc before(Peter Samuelson)
> gcc272 also
kwhich doesn't seem to work ok with several arguments if sh is bash-1.14.7:
$ sh scripts/kwhich kgcc gcc272 cc gcc
kgcc:gcc272:cc:gcc: not
On Fri, Dec 22, 2000 at 12:52:32AM +, Alan Cox wrote:
o Optimise kernel compiler detect, kgcc before(Peter Samuelson)
gcc272 also
kwhich doesn't seem to work ok with several arguments if sh is bash-1.14.7:
$ sh scripts/kwhich kgcc gcc272 cc gcc
kgcc:gcc272:cc:gcc: not
On Fri, Dec 22, 2000 at 12:52:32AM +, Alan Cox wrote:
2.2.19pre3
o Fix e820 handling (Andrea Arcangeli)
arch/i386/kernel/setup.c:
/* compare results from other methods and take the greater */
if (ALT_MEM_K EXT_MEM_K) {
On Sun, Dec 17, 2000 at 04:38:02PM +0100, Kurt Garloff wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 17, 2000 at 12:56:56PM +0200, Petri Kaukasoina wrote:
> > I guess the new memory detect does not work correctly with my old work
> > horse. It is a 100 MHz pentium with 56 Megs RAM. AMIBIOS
On Sun, Dec 17, 2000 at 04:38:02PM +0100, Kurt Garloff wrote:
On Sun, Dec 17, 2000 at 12:56:56PM +0200, Petri Kaukasoina wrote:
I guess the new memory detect does not work correctly with my old work
horse. It is a 100 MHz pentium with 56 Megs RAM. AMIBIOS dated 10/10/94 with
a version
I guess the new memory detect does not work correctly with my old work
horse. It is a 100 MHz pentium with 56 Megs RAM. AMIBIOS dated 10/10/94 with
a version number of 51-000-0001169_0011-101094-SIS550X-H.
2.2.18 reports:
Memory: 55536k/57344k available (624k kernel code, 412k reserved, 732k
I guess the new memory detect does not work correctly with my old work
horse. It is a 100 MHz pentium with 56 Megs RAM. AMIBIOS dated 10/10/94 with
a version number of 51-000-0001169_0011-101094-SIS550X-H.
2.2.18 reports:
Memory: 55536k/57344k available (624k kernel code, 412k reserved, 732k
On Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 12:26:02AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> egcs-1.1.2 builds 2.2.18pre. I know this because thats the compiler I use
> to build it. Its also the recommended compiler.
What do you mean by _the_ recommended compiler? Is 2.7.2.3 recommended no
more? Is there some benefit using
On Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 12:26:02AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
egcs-1.1.2 builds 2.2.18pre. I know this because thats the compiler I use
to build it. Its also the recommended compiler.
What do you mean by _the_ recommended compiler? Is 2.7.2.3 recommended no
more? Is there some benefit using
On Sun, Oct 01, 2000 at 01:01:34AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> I've dropped Miquel's version into my tree. He simply side steps the entire
> 'which which' issue and uses scripts/kwhich
Peter Samuelson's version worked in my Slackware systems. Miquel's kwhich is
ok too.
Another problem in Makefile.
On Sun, Oct 01, 2000 at 01:01:34AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
I've dropped Miquel's version into my tree. He simply side steps the entire
'which which' issue and uses scripts/kwhich
Peter Samuelson's version worked in my Slackware systems. Miquel's kwhich is
ok too.
Another problem in Makefile. I
On Sat, Sep 30, 2000 at 01:16:21AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> -CC =$(CROSS_COMPILE)$(shell if [ -n "`which gcc272 2>/dev/null`" ]; then echo
>"`which gcc272`";\
> - else if [ -n "`which kgcc 2>/dev/null`" ]; then echo "`which kgcc`"; else\
> +CC =$(CROSS_COMPILE)$(shell if [ -n "`which
On Sat, Sep 30, 2000 at 01:16:21AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
-CC =$(CROSS_COMPILE)$(shell if [ -n "`which gcc272 2/dev/null`" ]; then echo
"`which gcc272`";\
- else if [ -n "`which kgcc 2/dev/null`" ]; then echo "`which kgcc`"; else\
+CC =$(CROSS_COMPILE)$(shell if [ -n "`which gcc272
28 matches
Mail list logo
