Bug#283852: Bug#284952: The USB block device should be disabled

[Horms <horms@debian.org>]

On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 04:59:04AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 12:56:51PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 12:03:51PM +0100, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> > > On Sun, Jan 16, 2005 at 12:33:48PM +0100, Paul van Tilburg wrote:
> > > > The USB block device is known to be experimental and buggy.
> > > > CONFIG_BLK_DEV_UB=m should be set to 'n'.
> > > > 
> > > > Since the ub modules takes preference of the old, though working
> > > > usb-storage, hotplug loads ub.  Blacklisting ub doesn't help, loading
> > > > usb-storage doesn't work either.
> > > > I really would like for UB to be disable until proven reasonably stable.
> > > 
> > > Can someone merge this bug with #283852, plz? I'm unsure which of them
> > > to reassign.
> 
> I wonder about this, would it not be enough to blacklist the UB generated
> modules in hotplug and/or discover ? 

According to Paul van Tilburg, in Bug#284952 this does not help.
Though he didn't expand on why.

> > The merge thing doesn't work well with the way we
> > have multiple source packages for the kernel. 
> > 
> > It seems that this problem actually effects the following
> > source packages.
> > 
> > kernel-image-2.6.10-alpha-2.6.10
> > kernel-image-2.6.10-ia64-2.6.10
> > kernel-image-2.6.9-amd64-2.6.9
> > kernel-image-2.6.9-ia64-2.6.9
> > kernel-image-2.6.9-sparc-2.6.9
> > kernel-patch-2.6.10-mips-2.6.10
> > kernel-patch-powerpc-2.6.10-2.6.10
> > kernel-patch-powerpc-2.6.9-2.6.9
> > 
> > Would it be of value to duplicate, say #283852,
> > assign one copy to each of these source packages,
> > and then merge #283852 with #284952 on one package,
> > say kernel-patch-powerpc-2.6.9-2.6.9, where
> > at one of the bugs originated.
> > 
> > Also, sould I go through and fix the config
> > in svn, even though I can't build for any of these
> > architectures?
> 
> Fine with me, but see above.
> 
> Friendly,
> 
> Sven Luther

-- 
Horms