Re: how to debug this fuse problem
On Thursday 19 March 2015 08:17:23 Lisi Reisz wrote:
> On Wednesday 18 March 2015 23:41:21 Harry Putnam wrote:
> > Eduard Bloch <edi@gmx.de> writes:
> > > It's just the kernel from Jessie. See
> > > https://packages.debian.org/jessie/linux-image-3.16.0-4-586
> >
> > Sorry to be so dense here but:
> >
> > Apparently it is a little more going on in those lines above. I
> > don't see anything on the page you cite with names like:
> > 3.16.7-ckt4-3 3.16.7-ckt7-1
> >
> > searching with `aptitudue search ckt7' (or ckt4) finds nothing at
> > all.
> >
> > What is the meaning of the names with ckt in them?
>
> I did a Google search on "3.16.7-ckt4-3 debian" (without the quotation
> marks). I got this:
>
> https://packages.debian.org/sid/linux-headers-3.16.0-4-all
>
> Is that any help?
>
> Lisi
The ckt patches are from Con Kovilas, who was at one time a heavy
contributor to the kernel, with a much improved scheduler for desktops
being his specialty. But something he did caused a particularly nasty
regression about 2-3 years ago, & Linus blew up (as only Linus can do)
and banned him from direct contributions, so he has been publishing his
patchset on lkml, but you will have to get the patch from his site. I
expire lkml fairly aggressively here, so my history of that list doesn't
go back more than about 12,000 messages & I don't have that announcement
post now.
A google search, or a direct search on gmane might turn up his last
announce post which should get the OP a link to get that patch.
My own experience with his patches goes back quite a ways, and I have run
this machine or its predecessor on Con's kernels for a couple years,
they generally just worked, but were much snappier at desktop response
than the linus kernels of the day.
Mode rant (with some profanity):
The only reason I haven't tried a new kernel lately, is that to use it I
would also have to figure out how much of X I would have to pull and
build at the same time, primarily because I run nvidia cards, and the
current nouveau driver in the more recent kernels is totally
incompatible with the nouveau pieces in my X install. I have in my
grub, several 3.16.x kernels, none of which can play a video because of
the capability miss-match between the ancient X driver and the kernel
driver. The currently running 3.4-9amd64 works fairly well in that
regard.
Sadly, much of the debian X is 5+ years old. And the glxinfo output is,
shall we say, discouraging at best. Pull glxgears out to about 80% of
the screen & its 170 fps. So it plays a 40% of the screen video by
using a hell of a lot of a quad core phenom. I could try to put the
nvidia kit in, but support for my 3 year old GeForce 8400 GS has
already been dropped. And the older version that I can get does not
work with a kernel as new as the 3.4-9amd64 thats running now
And the only way to recover from an attempt to install the nvidia drivers
that fails , is a bare metal full system reinstall. Been there, done
that, about 5 or 6 times. nvidia designs good cards. But their
installer, designed by their lawyers, sucks 10 day old dead toads thru
soda straws, up with which I am no longer willing to put. So I run
whatever works now.
The competition, ATI, that AMD bought 3 or so years ago, is very
carefully no better as they don't release linux drivers for their stuff
until the card is out of production and supply shelves are empty, so its
not possible to match up an ATI card that exists with the linux drivers
to run it that exist at the same time. I have had Alex D., now usually
posting from X.org but paid by ATI/AMD, tell me personally via email
that I'd have a driver shortly for the card I had that was being run by
the vesa driver, or that there was support for card so-and-so, only to
find the card was now pure unobtainium, or that when they threw the code
over the fence, support for the card I had had been dropped as obsolete.
Over the now 17 years I have been running linux I bought that song and
dance, probably 700 dollars worth, and have yet to have a card that was
usable except with the vesa driver. And their driver installer is worse
than nvidias at destroying the system than the nvidia driver is. Once I
went out & got the exact card he quoted, only to find that without even
changing the color of a single dot above the i anyplace on the box, the
card in the box was a slightly newer production with a different gpu on
it that was unsupported. Needless to say that WAS the last straw, and
there will never be another ATI card in any of my boxes. To be blunt,
Alex D. is a liar, repeatedly.
I like to support the little guy, just so we would continue to have a
choice in video cards, but the "little guy" can damned well support the
user that bought the product, or he falls off the list of vendors to
purchase from. ATI was erased from that list, based on past
performance, about 4 years ago, shortly after I built this machine,
originally putting one of ATI's better priced ($170 or so) cards in it,
only to find there were no damned drivers for it except vesa. That
broke this camels back and the pencil got reversed in my hand.
/rant
Cheers, Gene Heskett
--
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>
Reply to: