maximilian attems <max@stro.at> wrote:
> your subject tells alpha1 squeeze built, those are in fact quite old,
> please try with a "proper" daily built.
>
Oh, you are right of course, my initial report was for alpha1.
Otavio has already prompted me to retry with an recent built, what
I did:
I used a daily built from 23. Aug 2010.
See the results on
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20100914224130.c22468d8.linux@wansing-online.de">http://lists.debian.org/20100914224130.c22468d8.linux@wansing-online.de
09-14-2010, 08:41 PM
maximilian attems
Bug#571035:
On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 10:41:30PM +0200, Holger Wansing wrote:
>
> Oh, you are right of course, my initial report was for alpha1.
> Otavio has already prompted me to retry with an recent built, what
> I did:
>
> I used a daily built from 23. Aug 2010.
> See the results on
>
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=571035#57
oh sorry got confused by all that.
could you post the content of the initramfs in question?
also the run of mkinitramfs might be interesting
sh -x /usr/sbin/mkinitramfs -k 2.6.32-5-486 -o /tmp/foo
which devices do exist on boot in that initramfs
ls /dev/[hs]da*
ls /dev/disk/by-uuid/
thanks
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20100914204153.GJ19138@baikonur.stro.at">http://lists.debian.org/20100914204153.GJ19138@baikonur.stro.at