Re: Building and cleaning the manual in advi
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 05:20:18PM +0100, Helge Kreutzmann wrote:
> Hello Sven,
> On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 05:25:52PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 05:04:09PM +0100, Helge Kreutzmann wrote:
> > > Hello Sven,
> > > On Sun, Feb 13, 2005 at 06:21:42PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Feb 13, 2005 at 03:45:31PM +0100, Helge Kreutzmann wrote:
>
> > > Any news on this? I yet do not see anything in the repository and
> > > according to
> > > http://qa.debian.org/~anibal/debian-NEW-summary.html
> > >
> > > advi is not in NEW?
> >
> > Ah, ... need to do this now.
>
> The change in the repository I see, but nothing in NEW.
I will upload as part of the ocaml 3.08.3 release.
> > $ linuxinfo
> > Linux pegasos2 2.6.10-powerpc #1 Fri Mar 4 10:32:57 CET 2005
> > One 7447/7457, altivec supported CHRP Pegasos2 999MHz processor, 665.60 total
> > bogomips, 512M RAM
> > System library 2.3.2
>
> Great.
>
> > Seems to work fine. I will check on ibook and oldworld/prep later on, but the
> > augsbourg 8-way power5 machine breaks i think :
>
> My ibook works, the oldworld/prep would be nice.
Ok, will get them to you later.
> > $ ./linuxinfo
> > Linux trick 2.6.10 #1 SMP Fri Jan 28 10:01:45 CET 2005
> > Unknown POWER5 (gr) CHRP IBM,9124-720 1656MHz processor, 0.00 total bogomips,
> > 7M RAM
> > System library 2.3.2
> >
> > The bogo mips value is wrong, as is the RAM amount (should be 7GB), and there
> > are 8 procs.
>
> Ok, the new version in unstable should report the number of CPUs
> correct. The bogomips value I cannot determine, since this machine
> does not print in in /proc/cpuinfo. (If you know another file in /proc
> or somewhere, which prints this, I might add it).
No idea, these are just bogus anyway.
> Can you run
>
> ls -l /proc/kcore
> ls -l /proc/meminfo
>
> on this machine?
luther@trick:~$ ls -l /proc/kcore
-r-------- 1 root root 8220839936 Mar 21 17:32 /proc/kcore
luther@trick:~$ ls -l /proc/meminfo
-r--r--r-- 1 root root 0 Mar 21 17:32 /proc/meminfo
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: