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

Re: prematurely deleting kernel packages !?!?!

On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 12:52:25AM -0700, brian wrote:


> i found 2.6.18 in unstable and will try that, but 
> i can't believe even if it were tested and shown
> to work on all the old world powerpc it is hardly
> yet time to delete it as it would not come down for
> another at least a week i would expect.(frankly,
> after getting no response to my test results i don't
> expect it to work here)

Me neither.

> actually i am starting to feel intuitively that 15 is
> getting stretched too far, there have never been and
> will never be any updates for it, so my choice i 
> suppose if 18 doesn't work is to go back to
> sarge until i hear that it does. 

Use a custom 2.6.18 kernel, see below.

> also i wish i had heard someone else here to try
> the 18 package, there were no reports at all, what
> is the deal, everybody disappearing just when it
> is important ??

I also have tested the .18 kernel Sven refered me to without success
(the one with BenHs patch for loading initrd). I got a mail that the
bug I reported was closed 366620, but I haven't responded, I guess I
should have, but I don't use the box in question anymore. And for
every kernel I test, I have to rescue with the woody install floppies
if it fails (I do that pretty fast, by now).

Since the problem is well-known, failing to load the initrd, it is
easy to workaround, by compiling in the drivers for the harddisk that
/ is on directly into the kernel. I have successfully ran a 2.6.18
kernel with the ide disk and ext2 complied into the kernel.

Being forced to use custom kernels is of course rather annoying in the
long run.

Hans Ekbrand (http://sociologi.cjb.net) <hans@sociologi.cjb.net>
Q. What is that strange attachment in this mail?
A. My digital signature, see www.gnupg.org for info on how you could
   use it to ensure that this mail is from me and has not been
   altered on the way to you.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: