similar to: RTLinux and EXT3 using 2.2.19 (need help badly)

Hi, for a RTlinux application I need to install a 2.4.0 kernel. prevoisly, my kernel 2.4.10 was supporting the ext3 fs and all my fs were under ext3. as 2.4.0 doesn't support ext3 I've got a problem to boot cause /proc is recognise as a ext3 fs and my kernel doesnt know how to mount it. what can I do and how to change back /proc to an ext2 fs thanks Fred

On 5 January 2016 at 10:55, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > On 5 January 2016 at 10:28, Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com> wrote: >> That's rather a hack, given that the 'l' actually has semantic >> meaning, but I suppose I could live with it. > > Not really. I disagree. "armv7l" is created specifically by Linux

Hi All, I need one information How much effort is required to port the the rSync utility to any of the RTOS available? (how much is the linux dependent code in the implementattion?) regards Thanks in Advance Biju -- Biju Perumal HCL Technologies Ltd. Voice +91-44-3728366 (Xtn-1134) http://san.hcltech.com

We apologize for multiple receipts. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Eighth Real-Time Linux Workshop October 12-15, 2006 Lanzhou University - SISE Tianshui South Road 222 Lanzhou, Gansu 730000

Hi all, Thank you so much for this discussion. It has been very helpful and educational. I think that I understand the perspectives of both Tim and Renato. Let me briefly summarize them to ensure that I correctly understand: Renato’s perspective is that the triple means whatever the author says it does, and that may or not be meaningful. :) In the case of armv7l (for example) it has a clear

On 5 January 2016 at 09:13, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > Anyhow, Artyom's proposal is the best, IMO, to treat it like an alias > and handle like v7A internally. If we end up needing specific > decisions in the driver, it should stay in the driver. That's rather a hack, given that the 'l' actually has semantic meaning, but I suppose I could live

Hi all,     I want to recompile the 2.6.24.19-xen kernel provided by Ubuntu hardy. I have install the linux-source linux-header deb but don''t know how to include the "xen patch" to the 2.6.24 source (I know 2.6.24 have Xen forward-ported) and compile the kernel. I am sorry this is quite a newbie question.. Could anyone help me?     Basically I want to compile a 2.6.24 Xen

I hesitate to call this a "bug" as I don't know all the history behind the ipfw2 decisions, so let me toss this out there and see I'm just missing something. Overview ======== The negated operator, "not recv any" was taken to mean "any packet never received by an interface" believed to be equivalent to "any packet that originated on the current

Taking the suggestions of the group under consideration, I’ve generated a new diff. The thing to note is that armv6l is now treated identically to armv6hl. I’ve also added a unit test. This seems to me to be the least invasive method, and holds to existing conventions as closely as possible. Thoughts? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name:

> You assume triples make sense. That's the first mistake everyone does > when thinking about triples. :) I know they don't make sense in many corner cases, but I think discarding logic where it *does* exist is a mistake. > AFAIK, "ARMv7B" is only used by HighBank, which is no more. But that, > too, was "ARMv7A big endian". I believe it's what any

Hi everyone, I've been reading this mailing list once in a while and I have seen that there are quite a few bugs that were resolved since EXT 0.0.7a. I was wondering if using 0.0.7a with kernel 2.2.19 is dangerous or ok because I have had some corrupted files once in a while (using compact flash disk CF on IDE bus). 0.0.7a is the only patch available for kernel 2.2.19 to my knowledge are

Hi, I found the following in the logs of a server that crashed: Mar 19 14:09:28 sc4 kernel: Assertion failure in ext3_free_blocks() at balloc.c line 358: "bh->b_committed_data != NULL" Mar 19 14:09:28 sc4 kernel: Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 00000000 Mar 19 14:09:28 sc4 kernel: current->tss.cr3 = 39b8b000, %%cr3 = 39b8b000 Mar 19 14:09:28

Hi, Here is the situation, I've got a very old webmail system running on kernel version 2.2.10 (I know, upgrade :) and it runs with quotas as the above suggests with ext2. I upgrade the system to kernel revision 2.2.19 + Stephen Tweedie's patches at ext3-0.0.7a.tar.gz (off kernel.org) with the kdb and ext3 patch applied. Booting up the new kernel still on ext2 reveals that quotas still

Hey everyone, I am planning to set up a debian server using the 2.2 kernel tree (kernel 2.2.20) I have tried applying the 2.2.19 patch once but it spewed out some rejects. I went ahead and selected yes to the second fs development code. When I converted all my partitions to 'ext3' (by adding a journal) everything seemed to go well, but when I rebooted (bad shutdown) the computer during

Hi, I am starting to do some benchmarks using mongo (www.namesys.com), and I am surprised by the big difference between ext3/2.2.19 and ext3/2.4.14. Sometimes the latter performs 3 or 4 times faster. Someone has similar results or is there something wrong in my test ? Attached is the benchmark. By the way, during the test, I got the message kernel: EXT3-fs error (device ide0(3,10)) in

I've not been happy with the stories about the "stable" 2.4.x kernels. Everywhere I read people saying "not for production use". Would you recommend adding ext3 to 2.2.19 (ext3-0.0.7a) or moving to 2.4.1x and using ext3 there (ext3-0.9.12)? -- -IAN! Ian! D. Allen Ottawa, Ontario, Canada idallen@ncf.ca Home Page on the Ottawa FreeNet: http://www.ncf.ca/~aa610/

We have a machine that is trying its darndest to house a linux kernel cvs repository. The machine is a dual 733mhz p3 netfinity of some kind. 512M of mem. Filesystem 1k-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on /dev/sda1 16484504 4015876 11631240 26% / /dev/sda2 31079 3199 26276 11% /boot /dev/sdb2 16516084 32828 15644264 1%

While ripping one of my cds on my laptop this happened: Message from syslogd@theirongiant at Thu Jul 5 09:52:16 2001 ... theirongiant kernel: Assertion failure in do_get_write_access() at transaction.c line 551: "handle->h_buffer_credits > 0" from the kern.log: Assertion failure in do_get_write_access() at transaction.c line 551: "handle->h_buffer_credits > 0"

Hi All, Has anyone had a similar problem with ext3? A 75 gig partition in 24x7 use for about 2 weeks - no problems. Today I ran bonnie++ on the partition to get a feel for the performance, with ext3 and quotas enabled. The box started swapping like crazy on and abruptly froze at at the 'Delete files in random order' step. There was no kernel error messages or the like. This partition

Hi all, ext3-0.0.7a is now out, at the usual places: ftp.uk.linux.org:/pub/linux/sct/fs/jfs/ and propagating now from ftp.*.kernel.org:/pub/linux/kernel/people/sct/ext3/ This fixes one major bug in ext3 recovery for metadata-only journaling. Because recovery can also happen in e2fsck, users should also upgrade to at least e2fsprogs-1.21-WIP-0601 (also provided at the above ftp sites).