[arch-general] [signoff] kernel26 2.6.31.1-1
Kernel is in testing for both architectures, please sign off (at least one for x86_64, two for i686).
I think tpowa had the kernel all ready to move to core, except he was waiting for the .1 release, which is there now.
The only thing bugging me is http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/16149, opinions?
Kernel is in testing for both architectures, please sign off (at least one for x86_64, two for i686).
I think tpowa had the kernel all ready to move to core, except he was waiting for the .1 release, which is there now.
The only thing bugging me is http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/16149, opinions?
Just be aware of this problem http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=627145
This Arch user lost /dev/tty0,1,2,3 device nodes on boot with 2.6.31 from the Arch testing repositry.
A friend of mine also had the same issue with a self compiled 2.6.31. On my laptop the same config works just fine - the only difference is he uses highmem=4G, while I don't - I only have 1G ram.. Even our hardware is allmost the same (thinkpad X60s his is an USA model mine is a EU model).
The problem is mentioned here too http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/9/24/444 but there hasn't been any response.
Damjan Georgievski schrieb:
Just be aware of this problem http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=627145
This Arch user lost /dev/tty0,1,2,3 device nodes on boot with 2.6.31 from the Arch testing repositry.
A friend of mine also had the same issue with a self compiled 2.6.31. On my laptop the same config works just fine - the only difference is he uses highmem=4G, while I don't - I only have 1G ram.. Even our hardware is allmost the same (thinkpad X60s his is an USA model mine is a EU model).
The problem is mentioned here too http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/9/24/444 but there hasn't been any response.
I was unaware of this, as there is no bug report assigned to me about it. Does this also happen with 2.6.31.1?
Just be aware of this problem http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=627145
This Arch user lost /dev/tty0,1,2,3 device nodes on boot with 2.6.31 from the Arch testing repositry.
A friend of mine also had the same issue with a self compiled 2.6.31. On my laptop the same config works just fine - the only difference is he uses highmem=4G, while I don't - I only have 1G ram.. Even our hardware is allmost the same (thinkpad X60s his is an USA model mine is a EU model).
The problem is mentioned here too http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/9/24/444 but there hasn't been any response.
I was unaware of this, as there is no bug report assigned to me about it. Does this also happen with 2.6.31.1?
yes
The problem is mentioned here too http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/9/24/444 but there hasn't been any response.
I was unaware of this, as there is no bug report assigned to me about it. Does this also happen with 2.6.31.1?
yes
there's a bit of discussion here... but, afaik, the patch linked after several back-and-forths didn't actually solve the problem for sure. http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/9/24/167
Damjan Georgievski schrieb:
The problem is mentioned here too http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/9/24/444 but there hasn't been any response.
I was unaware of this, as there is no bug report assigned to me about it. Does this also happen with 2.6.31.1?
yes
there's a bit of discussion here... but, afaik, the patch linked after several back-and-forths didn't actually solve the problem for sure. http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/9/24/167
The commit mentioned here happened just a few days ago, way after the 2.6.31 release, so how can it even be related to the problem?
Without a full dmesg from a failed boot attempt, we cannot say anything.
I think tpowa had the kernel all ready to move to core, except he was waiting for the .1 release, which is there now.
The only thing bugging me is http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/16149, opinions?
Just be aware of this problem http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=627145
This Arch user lost /dev/tty0,1,2,3 device nodes on boot with 2.6.31 from the Arch testing repositry.
I've found the source of the problem. My friend had a leftover /etc/udev/rules.d/udev.rules file that didn't belong to any package and this file had a rule to rename the ttyx nodes to vc/x. I still don't understand what the difference is there in 2.6.31 to trigger that rule?
On Saturday 26 September 2009 04:21:45 am Thomas Bächler wrote:
Kernel is in testing for both architectures, please sign off (at least one for x86_64, two for i686).
I think tpowa had the kernel all ready to move to core, except he was waiting for the .1 release, which is there now.
The only thing bugging me is http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/16149, opinions?
I can't sign off, but I have been running the 31.1-1 kernel for 3 days w/o any problems on both i586 and x86_64 :-)
12:19 alchemy:~> sar Last login: Mon Sep 28 06:53:12 2009 from alchemy.3111skyline.com 12:20 archangel:~> uptime 12:20:06 up 3 days, 11:07, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.01, 0.00 12:20 archangel:~> pmq | grep kernel kernel-headers 2.6.30.5-1 kernel26 2.6.31.1-1 kernel26-firmware 2.6.31-1 kernel26-lts 2.6.27.35-1 12:20 archangel:~> 12:20 archangel:~> uname -r 2.6.31-ARCH 12:21 archangel:~> uname -a Linux archangel 2.6.31-ARCH #1 SMP PREEMPT Sat Sep 26 01:05:11 CEST 2009 x86_64 AMD Phenom(tm) 9850 Quad-Core Processor AuthenticAMD GNU/Linux
12:19 alchemy:~> sff Last login: Mon Sep 28 06:52:40 2009 from alchemy.3111skyline.com 12:20 supersff:~> uptime 12:22:17 up 2 days, 23:35, 3 users, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00 12:22 supersff:~> pmq | grep kernel kernel-headers 2.6.30.5-1 kernel26 2.6.31.1-1 kernel26-firmware 2.6.31-1 kernel26-lts 2.6.27.35-1 12:22 supersff:~> uname -r 2.6.31-ARCH 12:22 supersff:~> uname -a Linux supersff 2.6.31-ARCH #1 SMP PREEMPT Sat Sep 26 02:39:09 CEST 2009 i686 Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 3.20GHz GenuineIntel GNU/Linux
participants (3)
-
Damjan Georgievski
-
David C. Rankin
-
Thomas Bächler