Re: slink release delayed
Steve Dunham <dunham@cse.msu.edu> writes:
> John Lapeyre <lapeyre@physics.arizona.edu> writes:
>
> > I'm not sure the kernel source for 2.2.1 should be there.
> > It had a nasty bug that hung the kernel when doing alot of disk I/O.
> > Leaves the partition in a mess when you reboot too. What I am saying
> > is that no one should run 2.2.1 .
>
> I haven't seen this yet (I've been building CDs for the last 2 weeks on a
> sparc with a 2.2.1 kernel with one IDE and three SCSI drives).
Well, it was a well known bug on the kernel mailing list and
affected quite a few people. I ran 2.2.1 for about a week with no
problems. I copied some multi-hundred MB trees around.
When I tried to copy a particular 500 MB tree from one
disk to another , the kernel hung. This was reproducible.
I don't know if the bug is i386 specific. It would
certainly be a good idea to have at least one kernel source
that produces a bootable kernel for the sparc platform !
>
> > It has been fixed in 2.2.2 , but it's too late for that.
>
> > ./dists/slink/main/binary-all/devel/kernel-source-2.2.1_2.2.1-1.deb
>
> Actually, I'd like to see the kernel-source-sparc package from
> incoming installed. The sparc platform offers 2.0.35 kernels on
> non-Ultra machines, and 2.2.1 kernels on all machines. (We need a
> late 2.1 or 2.2 kernel to boot on the Ultras, and it is too late to
> build new kernels and boot floppies. - Also, my Sparc20 still refuses
> to boot with any 2.0 kernel that Debian provides, so I need the 2.2.1
> kernel on that platform too.)
--
John Lapeyre <lapeyre@physics.arizona.edu>
Tucson,AZ http://www.physics.arizona.edu/~lapeyre
Reply to: