Bug#487421: Early boot-time kernel panic with linux-image-2.6.25-2-amd64 (2.6.25-5).
... and finally I'm hearing from myself !
Hello, Maks and others.
Because of some experiments with kernel 2.6.24-1 (always functional) I
got a rough idea of the modules I would really have to put in the initrd
(with respect to my hardware & BIOS) for kernel 2.6.25-2 (ver 2.6.25-5)
which I was not able to boot my system with. (c.f. my previous post.)
Hoollaoup*! I'm writing this e-mail under my now-functional kernel
2.6.25-2 (ver 2.6.25-5) -running system.
* I don't know the english world - if it exist - to convey such an
intense joy ;-)
Now, though, I very much fear this kernel (2.6.25-2 ver 2.6.25-5) be
broken and would endanger my - not so valuable - data (filesystems).
I say that because having read the following thread:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=485464
One can read that Arno Griffioen reported such corruptions with kernel
in linux-image-2.6.25-2-amd64 (which version?). Then you, Maks, answered
him to try out latest 2.6.26-rc5 (there is some 2.6.26-rc6~... snapshot
now).
You now see why I fear what I fear.
So, I decide to always run 2.6.25-2 (ver 2.6.25-5) ; that will serve as
a testcase (though not exhaustive wrt hardware & usage patterns). If you
can't hear from me in the following 1-2 year(s) that would mean that
kernel 2.6.25-2 (ver 2.6.25-5) crunched my whole system, all my
partitions ( Including M$ Windaube eXPrès ;-) ).
Said that, I still find the imputability of guilt, in the
Linux_Kernel/LILO/Initial_RAM_Disk case, be a moot point.
To your opinion, who's guilty ?
I don't necessarily want to make the case against Linux_Kernel
overflated ;-)
I'm looking forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely,
Valentin QUEQUET
Reply to: