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

[Fwd: Re: Bug#429985: PPC installer kernel panic from libc problem]

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	Re: Bug#429985: PPC installer kernel panic from libc problem
Date: 	Mon, 2 Jul 2007 09:48:12 +0200
From: 	Sven Luther <sven@powerlinux.fr>
To: 	Frans Pop <elendil@planet.nl>
CC: 	429985-done@bugs.debian.org, Peter Czanik <pczanik@fang.fa.gau.hu>,
References: 	<467A8952.4020701@fang.fa.gau.hu>
<[🔎] 200707020929.08453.elendil@planet.nl>

On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 09:28:58AM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Thursday 21 June 2007 16:21, Peter Czanik wrote:
> > Installation fails right after the kernel is booted with the following
> > message:
> > /bin/sh: symbol lookup error: /lib/libc.so.6: undefined symbol:
> > _rtld_global Kernel panic - not syncing: attembed to kill init!
> With today's daily images, this issue should now be fixed. It would be 
> great if you could confirm that.
> Note that CD images will only be fixed after the next bi-daily build, 
> which should be available in about 4 hours from now.
> The cause behind this issue is that there have been major changes in the 
> toolchain (libc, gcc, ...) since the release of Etch which has caused the 
> library reduction used when creating installer images to fail in 
> different ways on different architectures. Almost all architectures have 
> been affected and it has taken a fair amount of work from the D-I 
> developers and various toolchain maintainers to trace and fix these 
> regressions.
> A relatively recent change in kernel-wedge fixed this for a number of 
> architectures [1], but it sometimes takes a while for all machines that 
> take care of daily builds to be updated to the latest version of packages 
> used during builds.
> I hope this explains the situation somewhat and we're sorry for any 
> inconvenience, but on the other hand we did put up a notice some time ago 
> on [1] explaining that, because of the major changes happening after the 
> release of Etch, issues with daily builds are to be expected [2].

This does not excuse the complete silence in the bug report from the d-i
team. a simple note would have been best practice, and this kind of
silent is what brings the level of frustration that debian cause.

It is also sad that you needed to be insulting in another bug report,
and me raise a fuss about this, in order for you to be reminded of our
users, and properly inform them on this matter.

> Let me also use this opportunity to remind the Debian PowerPC community 
> that are still looking for people willing to get involved more in the 
> installer for PowerPC and help us deal with port-specific issues.

I stand ready to take my place in this, as i have always been. It is
regretful that you chose to go the vendetta way, and did not respond to
any of the conciliation proposals i initiated, in particular those
around the wiki page. In particular, it is sad that you where the one
who repeatedly asked for my expulsion.

I will reiterate my words of then to you now :

  Frans, can we please forget old grudges and offenses, recognize that
  both parties have badly erred in this, and let's keep in mind the well
  being of our users, as we promised we would when we became DD in our
  social contract.

But i have little hope that this will bring anything but you trying to
get me banned from the BTS, and yet, after a year and a half, you have
yet to find a replacement for my work. And our powerpc users are the one
suffering from it.

> In this case, this bug report from Peter was the first indication that 
> this issue also affected powerpc (thanks for submitting the report 
> Peter!).

It took you over 10 days, and a fuss from my part to notice it though.


Sven Luher

Reply to: