On Sat, 2008-11-01 at 18:13 +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
> Christian is the expert and already reviewed it and you tested it
> AFAICS. The patch looks also not invasive and would be very welcome from
> a user point of view.
>
> Please upload.
Done.
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
si
Your message dated Sun, 02 Nov 2008 09:17:04 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#479607: fixed in lilo 1:22.8-6.1
has caused the Debian Bug report #479607,
regarding lilo fails to boot 2.6.25 kernel image due to wrongly passing
initramfs
to be marked as done.
Paul Wise wrote:
> On Sat, 2008-11-01 at 17:07 +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
>
>> Any reason why you didn't upload your NMU yet?
>
> As I wrote to debian-release, I'm not hugely familiar with debconf and
> maintainer scripts, so I was hoping the release team wouldn't mind
> reviewing and ACKing the pat
On Sat, 2008-11-01 at 17:07 +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
> Any reason why you didn't upload your NMU yet?
As I wrote to debian-release, I'm not hugely familiar with debconf and
maintainer scripts, so I was hoping the release team wouldn't mind
reviewing and ACKing the patch.
--
bye,
pabs
http://wik
Hi Paul
Any reason why you didn't upload your NMU yet?
Cheers
Luk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Here's the updated translation, consistent with the last version of
templates proposed by Paul Wise.
--
fr.po
Description: application/gettext
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Mon, 2008-10-27 at 11:56 +0900, Paul Wise wrote:
> I propose to fix #479607 with the attached patch.
Ugh, the patch was buggy. Here is a new and tested one.
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
diff -u lilo-22.8/debian/lilo.config lilo-22.8/debian/lilo.config
--- lilo-22.8/debian/li
On Mon, 2008-10-27 at 11:56 +0900, Paul Wise wrote:
> I propose to fix #479607 with the attached patch. Since I'm not hugely
> familiar with debconf and maintainer scripts, I'm hoping you won't mind
> reviewing and ACKing the patch.
PS: the maintainer has ACKed the patch on IRC.
--
bye,
pabs
h
Hi RMs,
I propose to fix #479607 with the attached patch. Since I'm not hugely
familiar with debconf and maintainer scripts, I'm hoping you won't mind
reviewing and ACKing the patch. debian-i18n folks will do a second NMU
after translations are ready and also fix the grammar issues reported in
#31
On Sun, 2008-10-26 at 13:46 +0100, Christian Perrier wrote:
> Thinking deeper, it woul dbe better if I send my rewritten version:
Thanks a lot, will include this in my NMU.
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Quoting Justin B Rye ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > I'd propose "You will need to run the 'lilo' command..."
>
> This is only part of your suggestions where I can see any trace of
> French influence (it's that "the foo file/the file 'foo'" thing
> again). Stick with "re-run lilo", an expression that w
Christian Perrier wrote:
> > for passing the initrd to the kernel. You will need to re-run lilo
> > to make this option take effect.
>
> Here, s/lilo/LILO is more debatable as one wants to run the "lilo"
> command.
>
> I'd propose "You will need to run the 'lilo' command..."
This is only part
Thinking deeper, it woul dbe better if I send my rewritten version:
Template: lilo/add_large_memory
Type: boolean
Default: true
_Description: Do you want to add the large-memory option?
By default, LILO loads the initrd file into the first 15Mb of memory
to avoid a BIOS limitation with older sy
Quoting Paul Wise ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> _Description: Do you want to add the large-memory option?
> By default lilo loads the initrd file into the first 15Mb of memory
> to avoid a BIOS limitation with older systems (earlier than 2001).
I'd personnally write "By default, LILO loads..."
The c
On Sun, 2008-10-26 at 10:51 +, Justin B Rye wrote:
> Paul Wise wrote:
> > Template: lilo/add_large_memory
> [...]
> > If you have an older BIOS you may need to reduce the size of the initrd
> > *before* rebooting, please see README.Debian for tips on how to do that.
> ^
>
Paul Wise wrote:
> Template: lilo/add_large_memory
[...]
> If you have an older BIOS you may need to reduce the size of the initrd
> *before* rebooting, please see README.Debian for tips on how to do that.
^
Since you ask: this is a "comma splice". A semicolon or period
woul
Here's a quick update of the French translation of templates, based on
the wording proposed by Paul in this bug.
--
fr.po
Description: application/gettext
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Quoting Paul Wise ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> On Sun, 2008-10-26 at 07:46 +0100, Christian Perrier wrote:
>
> > Will you leave time for a translation update round?
>
> Well, the bug sprint lasts 5 days and I want cookies, so I'll add any
> translations available in that time period. I'm happy to do a
On Sun, 2008-10-26 at 07:46 +0100, Christian Perrier wrote:
> Will you leave time for a translation update round?
Well, the bug sprint lasts 5 days and I want cookies, so I'll add any
translations available in that time period. I'm happy to do a followup
NMU for translations, or the i18n folks mi
Quoting Paul Wise ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Hi all,
>
> [Please reply to myself, the bug and the list]
>
> As part of the bug sprint for cookies, I've been assigned to fix an RC
> bug in lilo (#479607 and clones). Since I don't know assembly, my
> proposed fix will be to add a debconf prompt asking
This looks fine. I intended to do this myself, but have not been upload
enabled recently, nor have had enough time to test large-memory on older
machines. My estimate though is that anything P3-era or newer has a new
enough BIOS to handle large-memory.
That said, this looks like the best solution
Hi all,
[Please reply to myself, the bug and the list]
As part of the bug sprint for cookies, I've been assigned to fix an RC
bug in lilo (#479607 and clones). Since I don't know assembly, my
proposed fix will be to add a debconf prompt asking if the person doing
the upgrade wants to add the larg
Hi,
As others have pointed out, this bug is not fixed for users upgrading
from previous versions. Would it be possible to provide a warning of
some sort when the initramfs is too big and large-memory is not used?
At the very least, some information about this in the lilo
documentation wou
With newest lilo (22.8-6) my linux-image 2.6.25 and 2.6.26 still fail
to boot...
debianmbp:~$ ll /boot/*2.6.25*
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 82331 27 jun 03:27 /boot/config-2.6.25-2-amd64
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 6797686 3 ago 01:34 /boot/initrd.img-2.6.25-2-amd64
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 6797272 10 j
Another request for adding the "large-memory" line in lilo.conf after
it's upgraded. Or at the very least issue a warning.
After I upgraded initramfs-tools my system I got kernel panics.
It was solved by adding that magic line.
Full story here: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=494
Forwarding for completeness purposes
-- Forwarded message --
From: Eddy Petrișor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 2008/7/31
Subject: Re: Bug#492918: [PANIC][REGRESSION]
linux-image-2.6.25-2-amd64: kernel fails to mount root on LVM2
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Debian Bug Tracking System wrote
Your message dated Sat, 26 Jul 2008 21:02:58 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#479607: fixed in lilo 1:22.8-6
has caused the Debian Bug report #479607,
regarding lilo fails to boot 2.6.25 kernel image due to wrongly passing
initramfs
to be marked as done.
This
I installed from debian-LennyBeta2-amd64-netinst.iso, which worked; I
then upgraded to linux-image-2.6.25-2-amd64, which failed (it did not
even try to run /init from initrd.img).
I then added large-memory to /etc/lilo.conf (at the global level), and
now it works. (I did not try MODULES=dep.)
Ma
Hello, I am yet another "me too" on this lilo-bug.
I installed a clean debian (debian-40r3-amd64-netinst) just a day ago,
and directly updated to lenny throu "aptitude dist-upgrade" and I got
a panic after rebooting into my new kernel and system.
My common sence is that I am installing on lvm2 on
Hi,
I haven't tried the workaround of "MODULES=dep", but the workaround
of "large-memory" in lilo.conf does not work for me...
/debianmbp:~# ll /boot/initrd.img-2.6.25-2-amd64*
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 6797272 10 jul 21:39 /boot/initrd.img-2.6.25-2-amd64
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 6738343 6 jul 01:5
Hi,
Thanks for the suggestion. I will be sure to do this in -6.
William
On Tue, 2008-07-15 at 19:31 +0200, Joergen Bergmann wrote:
> Package: lilo
> Version: 1:22.8-5
>
> CPU: intel Core2Duo 8400
> Board: Gigabyte GA P35-DS3R
>
> Hi,
>
> the kernel linux-image-2.6.25-2-amd64 (Version 2.6.25-6
Package: lilo
Version: 1:22.8-5
CPU: intel Core2Duo 8400
Board: Gigabyte GA P35-DS3R
Hi,
the kernel linux-image-2.6.25-2-amd64 (Version 2.6.25-6, migrated to
testing) fails to boot with Kernel panic, even with lilo 1:22.8-5.
Adding "large-memory" to lilo.conf solves the problem for me.
If i
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> close 479607
Bug#479607: lilo fails to boot 2.6.25 kernel image due to wrongly passing
initramfs
'close' is deprecated; see http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer#closing.
Bug closed, send any further explanations to Eugen Dedu <
reopen 479607
thanks
annonygmouse wrote:
Hi folks I've seen bug 479607 has been closed with lilo version 22.8-5
but I still can't boot my machine with 2.6.25-2...
debianmbp:~# LANG=C aptitude show lilo
Package: lilo
State: installed
Automatically installed: no
Version: 1:22.8-
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reopen 479607
Bug#479607: lilo fails to boot 2.6.25 kernel image due to wrongly passing
initramfs
'reopen' may be inappropriate when a bug has been closed with a version;
you may need to use 'found' to remove fixed versions.
B
Hi folks I've seen bug 479607 has been closed with lilo version 22.8-5
but I still can't boot my machine with 2.6.25-2...
debianmbp:~# LANG=C aptitude show lilo
Package: lilo
State: installed
Automatically installed: no
Version: 1:22.8-5
Priority: optional
Section: admin
Maintaine
Your message dated Mon, 23 Jun 2008 18:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#479607: fixed in lilo 1:22.8-5
has caused the Debian Bug report #479607,
regarding lilo fails to boot 2.6.25 kernel image due to wrongly passing
initramfs
to be marked as done.
This
Package: lilo
Version: 1:22.8-4
Followup-For: Bug #479607
-- System Information:
Debian Release: lenny/sid
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.25-1-686 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1
William Pitcock wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, 2008-05-27 at 19:57 +0200, Eugen Dedu wrote:
William Pitcock wrote:
Hi,
Is this because of the image size being too large? I need to know so I
can talk with upstream about this issue. He may not choose to help
though because we patch lilo a lot (something I
Hi,
On Tue, 2008-05-27 at 19:57 +0200, Eugen Dedu wrote:
> William Pitcock wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Is this because of the image size being too large? I need to know so I
> > can talk with upstream about this issue. He may not choose to help
> > though because we patch lilo a lot (something I inten
William Pitcock wrote:
Hi,
Is this because of the image size being too large? I need to know so I
can talk with upstream about this issue. He may not choose to help
though because we patch lilo a lot (something I intend to look through
and see how many of these patches we *really* need at some p
Hi,
Is this because of the image size being too large? I need to know so I
can talk with upstream about this issue. He may not choose to help
though because we patch lilo a lot (something I intend to look through
and see how many of these patches we *really* need at some point).
William
signatu
Am Dienstag, den 20.05.2008, 23:49 +0200 schrieb maximilian attems:
> > I have the described problem also with linux-image-2.6.25-2-amd64
> > 2.6.25-3.
>
> this is a lilo bug, haven't seen much reaction from lilo maintainer/dev
> side yet. see http://bugs.debian.org
Sebastien Cevey wrote:
Selon Eugen Dedu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
My machine prints:
[...]
[0.657884] ata_piix :00:1f.2: MAP [ P0 P2 P1 P3 ]
[0.684065] PCI: Setting latency timer of device :00:1f.2 to 64
[0.684121] scsi0 : ata_piix
[0.684256] scsi1 : ata_piix
[0.685195] a
Sebastien Cevey wrote:
Selon Eugen Dedu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
I have just found that the MODULES variable is in the /etc/initramfs/...
file. So I changed it and the kernel boots!
I had the initial problem too and I tried to change MODULES. Now the boot
process does find the root fs and starts
Selon Eugen Dedu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I have just found that the MODULES variable is in the /etc/initramfs/...
> file. So I changed it and the kernel boots!
I had the initial problem too and I tried to change MODULES. Now the boot
process does find the root fs and starts initializing stuff, h
Hi,
I have just found that the MODULES variable is in the /etc/initramfs/...
file. So I changed it and the kernel boots!
Official initrd: 6.7MB
With MODULES=dep: 3.2MB
--
Eugen
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTE
Could you please give me the command line? Is it
"MODULES=dep mkinitramfs -k -o /tmp/initramfs-2.6.25-2-amd64-mod
2.6.25-2-amd64"? It generates a file at nearly the same size as the
official one.
--
Eugen
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Troub
Hi,
just as a possible workaround:
maks asked me to try with MODULES=dep to make the created initramfs smaller,
- and indeed after changing it and regenerating the initramfs (and running
lilo ;) ) 2.6.25-2-amd64 booted fine on my MacBook (x86_64).
Regards,
Rene
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Zack Weinberg wrote:
I was having exactly the same problem and found that adding
"large-memory" to lilo.conf made it work.
Hi,
On my machine the bug persists with large-memory too (global section of
lilo.conf).
--
Eugen
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "uns
I was having exactly the same problem and found that adding
"large-memory" to lilo.conf made it work.
zw
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
After downgrading lilo to 1:22.8-3.1 (sept. 2007) andexecuting lilo -v,
the bug still persists. So it seems this has nothing to do with lilo??
--
Eugen
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
52 matches
Mail list logo
