[Bug 272630] [NEW] eth0 not connected. ubuntu boot gives e1000 eeprom checksum error and an eth0 MAC of 00:00:00:00:00
Public bug reported: This bug has reappeard. Googling shows this error going back to 2.6.17 but having a fix committed in 8.04.1. I am using 8.04.1 with a kernel updated to 2.6.26-5. Solved by setting via terminal the MAC : sudo ifconfig eth0 hw ether 00:1c:25:1e:0f:e6 or by putting this command in the local.rc file original dmesg: e1000: :00:19.0: e1000_probe: The EEPROM Checksum Is Not Valid [3.237072] /*/ [3.237072] Current EEPROM Checksum : 0xdcc7 [3.237072] Calculated : 0x5cc7 The MAC Address will be reset to 00:00:00:00:00:00, which is invalid [3.237072] and requires you to set the proper MAC address manually before continuing [3.237072] to enable this network device. ** Affects: ubuntu Importance: Undecided Status: New -- eth0 not connected. ubuntu boot gives e1000 eeprom checksum error and an eth0 MAC of 00:00:00:00:00 https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/272630 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 272630] Re: eth0 not connected. ubuntu boot gives e1000 eeprom checksum error and an eth0 MAC of 00:00:00:00:00
Also fails under Alpha 5 Ubuntu 8.10 with the dmesg error below: e1000e: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - 0.4.1.7 [2.501559] e1000e: Copyright (c) 1999-2008 Intel Corporation. [2.501591] e1000e :00:19.0: PCI INT A -> GSI 20 (level, low) -> IRQ 20 [2.501606] e1000e :00:19.0: setting latency timer to 64 [2.521201] USB Universal Host Controller Interface driver v3.0 [2.599635] SCSI subsystem initialized [2.623249] libata version 3.00 loaded. [2.639922] :00:19.0: :00:19.0: The NVM Checksum Is Not Valid [2.653561] e1000e :00:19.0: PCI INT A disabled [2.653569] e1000e: probe of :00:19.0 failed with error -5 -- eth0 not connected. ubuntu boot gives e1000 eeprom checksum error and an eth0 MAC of 00:00:00:00:00 https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/272630 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 60388] Re: e1000 EEPROM Checksum validity check should be disabled
I have this problem with both 2.6.26-5 and with Alpha 5 Ubuntu 8.10 (2.5.27-3). Solving it with a work around at the moment on 2.6.26 by using the terminal command ... sudo ifconfig eth0 hw ether 00:1c:25:1e:0f:e6 or by putting the command in the rc.local file. I have not tried a work-around for 2.6.27.that looks like a different problem but the same end result (no eth0). -- e1000 EEPROM Checksum validity check should be disabled https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/60388 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 272630] Re: eth0 not connected. ubuntu boot gives e1000 eeprom checksum error and an eth0 MAC of 00:00:00:00:00
** Description changed: This bug has reappeard. Googling shows this error going back to 2.6.17 but having a fix committed in 8.04.1. I am using 8.04.1 with a kernel updated to 2.6.26-5. Solved by setting via terminal the MAC : sudo ifconfig eth0 hw ether 00:1c:25:1e:0f:e6 or by putting this command in the local.rc file original dmesg: e1000: :00:19.0: e1000_probe: The EEPROM Checksum Is Not Valid [3.237072] /*/ [3.237072] Current EEPROM Checksum : 0xdcc7 [3.237072] Calculated : 0x5cc7 The MAC Address will be reset to 00:00:00:00:00:00, which is invalid [3.237072] and requires you to set the proper MAC address manually before continuing [3.237072] to enable this network device. + + eth0 is an Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82566DC Gigabit + + PC is a Thinkpad Lenovo T61p ** Description changed: This bug has reappeard. Googling shows this error going back to 2.6.17 but having a fix committed in 8.04.1. I am using 8.04.1 with a kernel updated to 2.6.26-5. Solved by setting via terminal the MAC : sudo ifconfig eth0 hw ether 00:1c:25:1e:0f:e6 or by putting this command in the local.rc file original dmesg: e1000: :00:19.0: e1000_probe: The EEPROM Checksum Is Not Valid [3.237072] /*/ [3.237072] Current EEPROM Checksum : 0xdcc7 [3.237072] Calculated : 0x5cc7 The MAC Address will be reset to 00:00:00:00:00:00, which is invalid [3.237072] and requires you to set the proper MAC address manually before continuing [3.237072] to enable this network device. eth0 is an Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82566DC Gigabit PC is a Thinkpad Lenovo T61p + + Also failed under 2.6.27-3 (Alpha 5 Ubuntu 8.10). Same end + result/'failure but it looks like a different error mechanism (see + comment below). ** Description changed: - This bug has reappeard. Googling shows this error going back to 2.6.17 - but having a fix committed in 8.04.1. I am using 8.04.1 with a kernel - updated to 2.6.26-5. + This bug has re-appeared. Googling shows this error going back to + 2.6.17 but having a fix committed in 8.04.1. I am using 8.04.1 with a + kernel updated to 2.6.26-5. Solved by setting via terminal the MAC : sudo ifconfig eth0 hw ether 00:1c:25:1e:0f:e6 or by putting this command in the local.rc file original dmesg: e1000: :00:19.0: e1000_probe: The EEPROM Checksum Is Not Valid [3.237072] /*/ [3.237072] Current EEPROM Checksum : 0xdcc7 [3.237072] Calculated : 0x5cc7 The MAC Address will be reset to 00:00:00:00:00:00, which is invalid [3.237072] and requires you to set the proper MAC address manually before continuing [3.237072] to enable this network device. eth0 is an Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82566DC Gigabit PC is a Thinkpad Lenovo T61p Also failed under 2.6.27-3 (Alpha 5 Ubuntu 8.10). Same end - result/'failure but it looks like a different error mechanism (see - comment below). + result/'failure but it looks like a different type of error.(see comment + and dmesg error below). -- eth0 not connected. ubuntu boot gives e1000 eeprom checksum error and an eth0 MAC of 00:00:00:00:00 https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/272630 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 272630] Re: eth0 not connected. ubuntu boot gives e1000 eeprom checksum error and an eth0 MAC of 00:00:00:00:00
** Description changed: This bug has re-appeared. Googling shows this error going back to 2.6.17 but having a fix committed in 8.04.1. I am using 8.04.1 with a kernel updated to 2.6.26-5. - Solved by setting via terminal the MAC : sudo ifconfig eth0 hw ether - 00:1c:25:1e:0f:e6 or by putting this command in the local.rc file + Solved by setting the MAC via terminal command : sudo ifconfig eth0 hw + ether 00:1c:25:1e:0f:e6 OR by putting this command in the local.rc file original dmesg: e1000: :00:19.0: e1000_probe: The EEPROM Checksum Is Not Valid [3.237072] /*/ [3.237072] Current EEPROM Checksum : 0xdcc7 [3.237072] Calculated : 0x5cc7 The MAC Address will be reset to 00:00:00:00:00:00, which is invalid [3.237072] and requires you to set the proper MAC address manually before continuing [3.237072] to enable this network device. eth0 is an Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82566DC Gigabit PC is a Thinkpad Lenovo T61p Also failed under 2.6.27-3 (Alpha 5 Ubuntu 8.10). Same end - result/'failure but it looks like a different type of error.(see comment + result/failure but it looks like a different type of error (see comment and dmesg error below). ** Tags added: 82566dc e1000 e1000e -- eth0 not connected. ubuntu boot gives e1000 eeprom checksum error and an eth0 MAC of 00:00:00:00:00 https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/272630 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 267952] Re: Ibex alpha 5 renders Pro/1000 ethernet non functional
you may want to try the fix I describe in bug #272630 -- Ibex alpha 5 renders Pro/1000 ethernet non functional https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/267952 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 263555] Re: [intrepid] 2.6.27 e1000e kernel places Intel gigE chipsets at risk
Colin, Seems that a warning may be insufficient. I would think most of the folks testing a pre-release may not know they have an e1000e driver or affected NIC. Maybe blacklist e1000e asap and then re-instate e1000e after a fix is found. Perhaps have the "warning" state something about the e1000e being temporarily withheld from the pre-release with certain Intel NICs affected. John -- [intrepid] 2.6.27 e1000e kernel places Intel gigE chipsets at risk https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/263555 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 263555] Re: [intrepid] 2.6.27 e1000e driver places Intel ICH8 and ICH9 gigE chipsets at risk
I had the duplicate bug 272630 and consider myself lucky. I had the Intel NIC but had used Alpha 5. I only had the dmesg error and not the hardware eeprom failure. I had Alpha 6 ready to test until I found this bug thread. For folks like me, it will be a good decision to blacklist e1000e pending a resolution. Most 1st time Alpha testers would not be as lucky or have the time to seek out a full bug thread. -- [intrepid] 2.6.27 e1000e driver places Intel ICH8 and ICH9 gigE chipsets at risk https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/263555 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
RE: [Bug 3731] Re: Xorg resolution falling back to 640x480 and/or 800x600when h/v freqs incorrect
Nice progress, Bryce. Yes, for me on Tribe 5 and on safe video (otherwise, I get a blank screen), I get edidfail for the ddcprobe command.so, I am one of the lucky ones. By the way, is there a new web site for bug 3731? My old bookmarks for bug 3731 have disappeared. Thanks. John Locke -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bryce Harrington Sent: Friday, September 28, 2007 1:26 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Bug 3731] Re: Xorg resolution falling back to 640x480 and/or 800x600when h/v freqs incorrect Heya all, I'm just surfacing to report some progress made on resolution detection for Gutsy. We've found a fix for a sub-class of this bug, for situations involving LCDs with "analog" connections (I assume this is VGA connections as opposed to DVI) where the highest (and most correct) resolution gets lost. This is bug 27667 and is due to poor logic in xresprobe/ddcprobe.sh that mixes up CRTs and LCDs. The logic is being dropped, which will fix this bug. There were also a couple other logical errors which may have caused other related monitor resolution mis-detections. 144956 also has a fix; it addresses an issue that cropped up after Tribe 5 for intel users that resulted in misdetected resolutions for some. This was caused by a patch added in Tribe 5. The patch will be dropped to fix the issue. For others experiencing this problem, a couple tips: run ddcprobe to see if it reports a series of timings for your monitor. If it instead returns "edidfail", you're seeing bug 94994. If it returns a correct list of resolutions, but the highest one is missing, and you're using an LCD, then you're seeing bug 27667. For everyone else, stay tuned... -- Xorg resolution falling back to 640x480 and/or 800x600 when h/v freqs incorrect https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/3731 You received this bug notification because you are a direct subscriber of the bug. -- Xorg resolution falling back to 640x480 and/or 800x600 when h/v freqs incorrect https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/3731 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kubuntu Team, which is a subscriber of a duplicate bug. -- kubuntu-bugs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-bugs
[Bug 3731] Re: Xorg resolution falling back to 640x480 and/or 800x600 when h/v freqs incorrect
Just tested tribe 5 Ubuntu and hoped the new GUI for screen resolution would finally assist in recognizing my 1028 x 768 LCD intel 810/815 screen resolution. Did not work. Only worked at low resolution on the safe video mode start up. Then use the terminal and the sudo dpkg-reconfigure xserver- xorg -phigh process as well as plugging in the horzsync and vert refresh numbers in xorg.conf. Only then do I get the 1028x768 resolution. Is there any way for the new GUI screen resolution in Tribe 5 to accept a custom configuration? If I use the GUI to plug in the intel 810, I still can not get the GUI to pick up a custom sync level. So, by custom I would like to see the GUI be able to take a custom sync level. Last Ubuntu that recognized my laptop resolution out of the box was 6.10. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Xorg resolution falling back to 640x480 and/or 800x600 when h/v freqs incorrect https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/3731 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kubuntu Team, which is a subscriber of a duplicate bug. -- kubuntu-bugs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-bugs
[Bug 3731] Re: Xorg resolution falling back to 640x480 and/or 800x600 when h/v freqs incorrect
Many thanks, Bryce, for investing so much in this solution. I love testing a wide range of Linux live CDs and find that a % recognize my i810 1024/768 laptop monitor and a % do not recognize it. My question is not part of the wiki spec discussion but more general. Can I ask if, in your mind, there is a Linux distribution out there that has solved this challenge to your satisfaction? If so, is it possible to borrow their solution for the famous Ubuntu distribution? Sorry if this question is too noobish. For me, I have gotten used to the xorg.conf edit process (as long as there is a safe video boot choice) but I can see for the vast number of potential users out there and the trend to Linux.an out of the box resolution recognition is critical. Anyway, if you need an Ubuntu tester for this bug please let me know. I would be more than glad to help. John Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Xorg resolution falling back to 640x480 and/or 800x600 when h/v freqs incorrect https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/3731 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kubuntu Team, which is a subscriber of a duplicate bug. -- kubuntu-bugs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-bugs
[Bug 3731] Re: Xorg resolution falling back to 640x480 and/or 800x600 when h/v freqs incorrect
Byce, Not sure if I should post this here or add to the wiki solution but I have attached the boot screen for the MEPIS solution to the Ubuntu #3731 bug. The MEPIS 6.0 Linux distro is actually based on Ubuntu packages but they added this front end capability to resolve the monitor resolution problem. Appears to be a good solution that Ubuntu could possibly consider. John Locke [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** Attachment added: "Example of MEPIS solution to bug #3731" http://launchpadlibrarian.net/9049120/C%3A%5CDocuments%20and%20Settings%5COwner%5CDesktop%5CMEPIS.jpg -- Xorg resolution falling back to 640x480 and/or 800x600 when h/v freqs incorrect https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/3731 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kubuntu Team, which is a subscriber of a duplicate bug. -- kubuntu-bugs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-bugs
[Bug 569495] [NEW] no log-in required for multiple users
Public bug reported: Binary package hint: firefox For 10.04RC, added three different users (admin and desktop) with password required for each. Used the System admin "users and groups" function. But, at boot-up, no log-in requirement occurs and o/s boots up automatically. I expected ubuntu to boot-up to the log-in portion and to have one of the three log-ins and passwords required for a full boot-up. This is what has happened/occured for all previous Ubuntu versions. ** Affects: firefox (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New -- no log-in required for multiple users https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/569495 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 569495] Re: no log-in required for multiple users
This also shows up in the remastersys process. A remastersys iso from Ubuntu 10.04RC boots up but then results in a log-in requirement which has an authentication failure. I am assuming the two issues are related. -- no log-in required for multiple users https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/569495 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 569495] Re: no log-in required for multiple users
For further claification, I did a full Ubuntu 10.04 RC installation on to an 8GB usb flash (which I have done with a number of previous Ubuntu versions). -- no log-in required for multiple users https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/569495 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 569495] Re: no log-in required for multiple users
Thanks so mucha little embarrasing! Is that a new menu itemthe Login Screen? In any case, that fixed the issue. Sorry to bother you busy professional developers! Thanks again. -- no log-in required for multiple users https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/569495 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
