Re: r8168b woes
I got a netboot version of the kernel installed, it was created using
the linux-source-3.2 from the unstable branch then using the
live-build scripts created the netboot.
It won't boot to completion, the last few messages I get are:
r8169 0000:02:00.0: eth0: unable to load firmware patch
rtl_nic/rtl8168e-3.fw (-2)
r8169 0000:02:00.0: eth0: link down
ADDRCONF(NETDEV_UP): eth0: link is not ready
IP-Config: eth0 hardware address XX:XX:XX:XX:XX:XX mtu 1500 DHCP RARP
However The image does work when running on a VirtualBox PXE Boot
image. So I'm still suspecting the network driver here, although I
can't get far enough into the boot process to actually look at dmesg.
I'll try recreating the image including the firmware-realtek package
see if that helps.
I'm not sure if I'm using the same kernel as with unstable since I'm
compiling from source. I'm not sure if the fix is a debian specific
patch or if the kernel image is supposed to have the fix included. I
was unable to get a netboot of sid working but I'm guessing that
live-debian is supposed to be based on stable.
I'll update as I learn more.
Jeffrey
On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 4:03 PM, Thorsten Glaser <t.glaser@tarent.de> wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Oct 2012, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>
>> Do you get a 'NETDEV WATCHDOG' warning in the kernel log? If so this
>> may be a known bug which is fixed in 3.2.25. Try the package from
>> unstable (linux-image-3.2.0-4-amd64 version 3.2.30-1).
>
> For what it’s worth, installing 3.2.0-4 on a manitu dedicated server
> fixes that problem for me, twice (i.e. on two boxen, all r8169, with
> different configurations).
>
> bye,
> //mirabilos
> --
> 15:41⎜<Lo-lan-do:#fusionforge> Somebody write a testsuite for helloworld :-)
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-backports-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
> Archive: [🔎] alpine.DEB.2.02.1210220103080.18486@tglase.lan.tarent.de">http://lists.debian.org/[🔎] alpine.DEB.2.02.1210220103080.18486@tglase.lan.tarent.de
>
Reply to: