[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Touching vmlinux.coff, was Re: Current benh-kernel fails to boot (after clock) on iBook G4



Hello Sven,
On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 07:25:43PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Ok. So I should ask Benjamin Herrenschmid to fix this and close the
> > Debian bug, right?
> 
> Yep. Let me check if the fix is already in the debian package, so you
> can also directly send him a patch. That said, i have some doubt about
> the longevity of the 2.4 -benh tree, seeing as there seem to be no new
> activity there since february.

I already sent Ben a patch about a config help option which was
miswritten. So please send me the patch, so I can forward it to Ben,
and then I'll close the Bug in the Debian BTS with the explanation
given to me by you.

> And you were hit by the real problem of debian on ppc, everyone writing
> howtos and such to work aroudn problems, instead of working on fixing
> the problems, or even filling bugs. 

That is why I filed the bug about kernel-package, because I (wrongly)
thought the error to lay there.  That is the downside of reporting
bugs, sometimes you hit the wrong package.  To state this right here:
I really try to locate bugs and fill bug reports; if possible with
patches (see also below).  I currently have 60something open(!) bugs
in the Debian BTS, many concerned with 64bit issues (my primary
platform is alpha), and much more already closed (some maintainer are
really magnificent!).

As another example I filed a bug about an suboptimal keyboard layout
on my german iBook, and it was suprisingly fast included in the
appropriate package (Mainly Apple -> AltGr). So this HOWTO step won't
be necessary for future users. One less, so to speak.

> The powerpc 2.4 debian kernel has been following the benh tree since
> 2.4.24 or so.

I'll try to mail some of the HOWTO maintainers, that they should
change that paragraph to recomend using Debian kernels.

> The above probably obsolet recomendations. But what if someone else with
> less knowledge has the same needs as you ? This one you let in the dark.
> The correct way of solving this, would be to fill a bug report against
> the appropriate debian package, saying what you need which is not
> provided by it. That said, i build mostly _all_ modules, so maybe you
> need to apply a patch anyway or something ? 

You are right, of course. This is what I try to do. But e.g. being on
a laptop I needed an encrypted filesystem, and yes, it did *not* work
with the crypto-modules in the kernel. I got the aes-kernel-module
packages, build them and it worked. But I don't know where the error
is -- did I simply make some mistake? Also I don't know how to make
this more easy, i.e. which package could provide more automation. So
maybe there is an error in the kernel modules. I can file a bug
report.

> > My machine is not currently fully supported by Debian (e.g. my radeon
> > card is too new), so thats why I try to switch to 2.6 right now.
> 
> You have a radeon X800 or something such ? Again, how do you expect us
> to change that if you don't fill bug reports ? And just for the record,
> i came back from almost a month of offlineness, and it is only by cheer
> luck that i saw this email out of the 1000 or so unread debian-powerpc
> mails, so a bug report is always better than a post on debian-ppc. You
> can CC the list if you feel it usefull though if you want.

I can dig out the exact model later. I did notice this error on the
ppc-list. The installer-page does not mention that people should sent
in installer reports for ppc (it did a while ago, but now it does not
do so anymore for most archs). I asked on the list, if I should file
one, but no one answered, so I thought this was not needed. 

I think the problem Collin fixed was that if the video=ofonly option
is used during installs, it is carried over to the yaboot.conf for
later use. My radeon is currently not supported in 2.4 framebuffer
(and hence X, as I understand), that's why I switch to 2.6. I still
have the patches to get that corrected for 2.6.6, and I am willing to
file this as a bug, when I know it works. But since I have almost no
devices right now (and probably have to set up udev), I cannot say for
certain that this patches work as expected. Also I understood that Ben
gets them included in the next kernel.

So simply put: I file bugs when I know on which side of the keyboard
the bug is and which package I can file it against. Are installation
reports still requested on ppc? Should I file that radeon problem
against 2.4-packages of Debian?

> > Currently I have no devices (but the grey X seems to work) and I start
> > reading about udev which I probably will need. If I run into deadlocks
> > here, I'll return and ask for help.
> 
> Please try out Jens's 2.6.6 kernel package and help out improving it,
> instead of doing it all yourself in the true debian-ppc howto writer
> way.

Ok. I will. This would be "kernel-source-2.6.6" together with
"kernel-patch-powerpc-2.6.6" right? 

Thanks

         Helge
-- 
Helge Kreutzmann, Dipl.-Phys.               Helge.Kreutzmann@itp.uni-hannover.de
  gpg signed mail preferred    gpg-key: finger kreutzm@zibal.itp.uni-hannover.de
    64bit GNU powered                  http://www.itp.uni-hannover.de/~kreutzm
       Help keep free software "libre": http://www.freepatents.org/

Attachment: pgprmgGFilouP.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: