Bug#42215: marked as done ()
Your message dated 18 Aug 1999 01:33:41 -0400
with message-id <oazozpr6tm.fsf@burrito.fake>
and subject line duplocate bug closed
has caused the attached bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I'm
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Ian Jackson
(administrator, Debian bugs database)
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 30 Jul 1999 21:28:38 +0000
Received: (qmail 25642 invoked from network); 30 Jul 1999 21:28:36 -0000
Received: from zeta.webdirekt.de (HELO msnt40isp001) (195.243.240.12)
by master.debian.org with SMTP; 30 Jul 1999 21:28:36 -0000
Received: from atlas (206.175.102.2)
by msnt40isp001 with MERCUR-SMTP/POP3/IMAP4-Server (v3.10.09 AS-0098310)
for <submit@bugs.debian.org>; Fri, 30 Jul 1999 23:28:43 +0200
From: "Hans-Joachim Peters" <Hans-Joachim.Peters@frost.de>
To: <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject:
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 1999 23:30:49 +0200
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1161
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <990730232843238800@msnt40isp001>
Info:
Hardware:
Toshiba Satellite 2590XDVD
Celeron 400 MHz
64 MB
6.4 GB Harddisk
Booting from CD with:
linux 2.0.36 (from kernel-image 2.0.36_2.0.36-3
Problem:
lilo hangs with the following message:
"
lilo loading linux......
"
Work-a-round:
Disabling processor cache (in and external) will solve the problem
Just disabling external cache does not solve the problem.
Hint:
At least booting with the "kernel-image scsi 2.0.3.36... is possible.
After installation the system hangs also on "lilo loading linux..........."
Question:
Is there any parameter which i can change so that the system will work with
cache
regards
Hajo Ehlers
Reply to: