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

Re: USB problem, hardware issue

On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 09:29:18AM +0100, Pascal Hambourg wrote:
> Joel Roth a écrit :
> >>>
> >>> (running sid)
> (...)
> > Good idea! I tried booting Rescatux, and didn't see any
> > trace of problems with the USB input devices.
> > 
> > And then rebooting my usual system, the issue with lost
> > keystrokes/mouse-movements return.  Happily, it's not
> > hardware. 
> When running sid, my first guess would not be hardware.
> > Rescatux is 3.2.0-4-amd64, my current system is 3.2.0-3-amd64 
> Why are you still running such an old kernel (even older than the kernel
> in stable) with sid ? There have been issues when the kernel and udev
> are of too different ages.

I wasn't paying attention...  I had considered that kernel
interfaces remained stable over time.  Once I could get the
driver and firmware for my wireless card compiled in the
kernel, I pretty must lost interest in future upgrades. I
never needed any new features. 
I upgraded sid, either to get new versions of software,
and to avoid too long a gap in time (which I was told could
lead to problem in upgrades having too cross too much
"distance".) I note that apt-get upgrade/dist-upgrade did
not advise installing new kernels. 

Although there are few guarantees for sid, I never
imagined that upgrading through a non-broken dependency
graph would break my system, and end up corrupting two NTFS
file systems that cannot be easily fixed by utilities
commonly available under Linux. (Ext4 didn't seem
to suffer as much.)

This is one of the bigger file system corruption issues
I've had with Debian. Fortunately, the partitions were
automatically remounted read-only while the contents
were still readable, and fortunately, I've been particular
about backing up.

I guess my inadvertent experiment illustrated these
dependencies between udev and the kernel.  No doubt future
upgrades of debian will require that kernel upgrades be
baked into the package dependency tree.



Joel Roth

Reply to: