>From jim Tue May 30 05: 00:57 2000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by mail.bear-cave.org.uk with esmtp
(Exim 3.14 #1) id 12wdD5-0005Xs-00 for [EMAIL PROTECTED];
Tue, 30 May 2000 05:00:55 +0100
X-From_: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue May 30 01:31:12 2000
Received: from pop.pol.net.uk by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.3.7) for
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (multi-drop); Tue, 30 May 2000 05:00:55 +0100 (BST)
Received: from [199.222.69.4] (helo=mail.acm.org) by mail8.svr.pol.co.uk with
esmtp (Exim 3.13 #0) id 12wZw7-0008Cd-00 for [EMAIL PROTECTED];
Tue, 30 May 2000 01:31:11 +0100
Received: from lml.valinux.com ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [198.186.203.19]) by
mail.acm.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA20228;
Mon, 29 May 2000 20:29:01 -0400
Received: from vger.rutgers.edu (vger.rutgers.edu [128.6.190.2]) by
lml.valinux.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C91A5AEDE;
Mon, 29 May 2000 17:24:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vger.rutgers.edu via listexpand id <S156068AbQE3AOq>;
Mon, 29 May 2000 20:14:46 -0400
Received: by vger.rutgers.edu id <S156237AbQE3AIR>;
Mon, 29 May 2000 20:08:17 -0400
Received: from bru-cse-164.cisco.com ([144.254.3.222]:46103 "EHLO
bru-cse-164.cisco.com") by vger.rutgers.edu with ESMTP id <S156436AbQE2Xps>;
Mon, 29 May 2000 19:45:48 -0400
Received: (from mduponch@localhost) by bru-cse-164.cisco.com (8.8.5/CA/950118)
id BAA26300; Tue, 30 May 2000 01:47:44 +0200 (MET DST)
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 09:26:38 +0100 (BST)
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Marc Duponcheel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: XFMail 1.4.4 on Linux
Organization: Cisco Systems
X-uname: SunOS 5.5.1 sun4u
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Orcpt: rfc822;sparclinux-outgoing
From: Marc Duponcheel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: root
Subject: Re: 2.4.0-test1-ac4 (was: 2.3.99-pre9 not booting to completion)
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > On a Sparc 5 it seems that both 2.3.99-pre9 and 2.4.0-test1-ac4
> > fail on mounting /proc during init.
> > 2.3.99-pre9 did not output anything
> > 2.4.0-test1-ac4 invokes a watchdog:
>
> Im am in the middle of a rather large sparc32 cleanup. I have held a lot
> of my patches (sbus/iommu rewrite, highmem support) back until I fix
> the caching stuff. Hopefully sparc32 will back to working condition soon.
Thanks Anton for the optimistic feedback ... I felt like I was the only
one seeing ghosts (the 'ok ' prompt that is :)
> > This machine has once run 2.3.99-pre3 for a day. I recall that it had
> > an empty /proc/openprom as opposed to 2.2.1{4,5} kernels.
>
> /proc/openprom is now a filesystem. You can mount it from your /etc/fstab:
> none /proc/openprom openpromfs defaults 0 0
Shall I try that on the vanilla-ac source tree or do you recommend to rather
wait for your commits?
-- Marc Duponcheel.
[work] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[home] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in
the body of the message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in
the body of the message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
