2.6.24-21 upgrade fails

[frankdn]

I've been running 2.6.24-19 happily for some weeks now. When the update manager's automatic feature offered me an upgrade to 2.6.24-21, I took the bait. The download and verification appeared to complete successfully. A dialog asked, what would I like to do about grub/menu.lst? (This is a dual-boot laptop, and I've modified menu.lst to offer the Windows option.) I choose 'do a 3-way merge (experimental)'-- not that I think this has anything to do with the error, but I suppose it may.... Anyway, when the dust settled, menu.lst had not been altered and I'm still booting into -19. The -21 kerenel, initrd and all the other files in /boot are present and look OK, AFAIK.

I'm tempted to hand-edit menu.lst, add in the -21 kernel, and see what happens.

The update dialog offered these clues:

Selecting previously deselected package linux-image-2.6.24-21-generic.
(Reading database ... 137829 files and directories currently installed.)
Unpacking linux-image-2.6.24-21-generic (from .../linux-image-2.6.24-21-generic_2.6.24-21.42_i386.deb) ...
Done.
Selecting previously deselected package linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.24-21-generic.
Unpacking linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.24-21-generic (from .../linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.24-21-generic_2.6.24-21.32_i386.deb) ...
Preparing to replace jockey-gtk 0.3.3-0ubuntu8 (using .../jockey-gtk_0.3.3-0ubuntu8.1_all.deb) ...
Unpacking replacement jockey-gtk ...
Preparing to replace jockey-common 0.3.3-0ubuntu8 (using .../jockey-common_0.3.3-0ubuntu8.1_all.deb) ...
Unpacking replacement jockey-common ...
Preparing to replace linux-generic 2.6.24.19.21 (using .../linux-generic_2.6.24.21.23_i386.deb) ...
Unpacking replacement linux-generic ...
Preparing to replace linux-image-generic 2.6.24.19.21 (using .../linux-image-generic_2.6.24.21.23_i386.deb) ...
Unpacking replacement linux-image-generic ...
Preparing to replace linux-restricted-modules-common 2.6.24.13-19.45 (using .../linux-restricted-modules-common_2.6.24.14-21.51_all.deb) ...
Unpacking replacement linux-restricted-modules-common ...
Selecting previously deselected package linux-restricted-modules-2.6.24-21-generic.
Unpacking linux-restricted-modules-2.6.24-21-generic (from .../linux-restricted-modules-2.6.24-21-generic_2.6.24.14-21.51_i386.deb) ...
Preparing to replace linux-restricted-modules-generic 2.6.24.19.21 (using .../linux-restricted-modules-generic_2.6.24.21.23_i386.deb) ...
Unpacking replacement linux-restricted-modules-generic ...
Selecting previously deselected package linux-headers-2.6.24-21.
Unpacking linux-headers-2.6.24-21 (from .../linux-headers-2.6.24-21_2.6.24-21.42_all.deb) ...
Selecting previously deselected package linux-headers-2.6.24-21-generic.
Unpacking linux-headers-2.6.24-21-generic (from .../linux-headers-2.6.24-21-generic_2.6.24-21.42_i386.deb) ...
Preparing to replace linux-headers-generic 2.6.24.19.21 (using .../linux-headers-generic_2.6.24.21.23_i386.deb) ...
Unpacking replacement linux-headers-generic ...
Preparing to replace nvidia-glx-new 169.12+2.6.24.13-19.45 (using .../nvidia-glx-new_169.12+2.6.24.14-21.51_i386.deb) ...
Unpacking replacement nvidia-glx-new ...
Setting up linux-image-2.6.24-21-generic (2.6.24-21.42) ...
Running depmod.
update-initramfs: Generating /boot/initrd.img-2.6.24-21-generic
Running postinst hook script /sbin/update-grub.
Searching for GRUB installation directory ... found: /boot/grub
Searching for default file ... found: /boot/grub/default
Testing for an existing GRUB menu.lst file ... found: /boot/grub/menu.lst
Searching for splash image ... none found, skipping ...
Found kernel: /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.24-21-generic
Found kernel: /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.24-19-generic
Found kernel: /boot/memtest86+.bin
Merging changes into the new version
User postinst hook script [/sbin/update-grub] exited with value 1
dpkg: error processing linux-image-2.6.24-21-generic (--configure):
subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 1
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.24-21-generic:
linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.24-21-generic depends on linux-image-2.6.24-21-generic; however:
Package linux-image-2.6.24-21-generic is not configured yet.
dpkg: error processing linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.24-21-generic (--configure):
dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
Setting up jockey-common (0.3.3-0ubuntu8.1) ...

Setting up jockey-gtk (0.3.3-0ubuntu8.1) ...
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of linux-image-generic:
linux-image-generic depends on linux-image-2.6.24-21-generic; however:
Package linux-image-2.6.24-21-generic is not configured yet.
linux-image-generic depends on linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.24-21-generic; however:
Package linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.24-21-generic is not configured yet.
dpkg: error processing linux-image-generic (--configure):
dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
Setting up linux-restricted-modules-common (2.6.24.14-21.51) ...

dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of linux-restricted-modules-2.6.24-21-generic:
linux-restricted-modules-2.6.24-21-generic depends on linux-image-2.6.24-21-generic; however:
Package linux-image-2.6.24-21-generic is not configured yet.
dpkg: error processing linux-restricted-modules-2.6.24-21-generic (--configure):
dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of linux-restricted-modules-generic:
linux-restricted-modules-generic depends on linux-restricted-modules-2.6.24-21-generic; however:
Package linux-restricted-modules-2.6.24-21-generic is not configured yet.
dpkg: error processing linux-restricted-modules-generic (--configure):
dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of linux-generic:
linux-generic depends on linux-image-generic (= 2.6.24.21.23); however:
Package linux-image-generic is not configured yet.
linux-generic depends on linux-restricted-modules-generic (= 2.6.24.21.23); however:
Package linux-restricted-modules-generic is not configured yet.
dpkg: error processing linux-generic (--configure):
dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
Setting up linux-headers-2.6.24-21 (2.6.24-21.42) ...
Setting up linux-headers-2.6.24-21-generic (2.6.24-21.42) ...

Setting up linux-headers-generic (2.6.24.21.23) ...
Setting up nvidia-glx-new (169.12+2.6.24.14-21.51) ...

Processing triggers for libc6 ...
ldconfig deferred processing now taking place
Errors were encountered while processing:
linux-image-2.6.24-21-generic
linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.24-21-generic
linux-image-generic
linux-restricted-modules-2.6.24-21-generic
linux-restricted-modules-generic
linux-generic
E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)
A package failed to install. Trying to recover:
Setting up linux-image-2.6.24-21-generic (2.6.24-21.42) ...
Running depmod.
update-initramfs: Generating /boot/initrd.img-2.6.24-21-generic
Running postinst hook script /sbin/update-grub.
Searching for GRUB installation directory ... found: /boot/grub
Searching for default file ... found: /boot/grub/default
Testing for an existing GRUB menu.lst file ... found: /boot/grub/menu.lst
Searching for splash image ... none found, skipping ...
Found kernel: /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.24-21-generic
Found kernel: /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.24-19-generic
Found kernel: /boot/memtest86+.bin
Updating /boot/grub/menu.lst ... done


Setting up linux-restricted-modules-2.6.24-21-generic (2.6.24.14-21.51) ...

Setting up linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.24-21-generic (2.6.24-21.32) ...
update-initramfs: Generating /boot/initrd.img-2.6.24-21-generic

Setting up linux-image-generic (2.6.24.21.23) ...
Setting up linux-restricted-modules-generic (2.6.24.21.23) ...
Setting up linux-generic (2.6.24.21.23) ...

[godfree2]

avoid -21 !
avoid -21 !

it killed 3 installs of mine!

Doesn't anyone test these before release? We expect more quality control, instead we get screwed. How can we expect people to migrate away from M$ ?
Hey developers "get your <snip> together."

[gcee]

I ran across the same problem, in my case it killed my nvidia drivers and could not reinstall them.

I got an error indicating it could not load the nvidia.ko file or the kernel would not allow access.

not to mention stopping X was a bear

I just restarted and selected .19 generic and used synaptic to remove the .21 kernel

so far things are working as they were before, which aren't 100% since upgrading to Hardy in the first place.

used to be I could leave my machine running for many months, now if I get 3 weeks without having to restart/reboot, I'm lucky

best

[godfree2]

try
http://www.supergrubdisk.org/

I'm going to try it ASAP

[godfree2]

the kernel "upgrade" to -21 forces grub to boot to the first partition
hd(0,0)

To fix this, at boot up select "e" to edit the grub menu item
then select the line root
change the last number to the partition minus 1
ex
is your linux install is on partition 3
then the grub line should read
root (hd0,2)

the nvidia gets altered by the -21 "upgrade" as well
to solve this boot to 'recovery' mode
then select fix X
then boot normally
once in ubuntu open the synaptic package manager, search and get the "envyNG" packages. They do a very good good job at keeping nvidia drivers installed and configured. I've found the 96.43.xx drivers to be the most stable.

[overdrank]

If you choose to reply to a post then please do so politely. :)

[roro100]

I got my fglrx driver back and now I have my ATI acceleration back on.
My wireless did not work at first, but seems to be workng now, after I unplugged and pluggen back in my router.
For some reason though before I had wl as my wireless driver shown in Restricted drivers, but now it shows Broadcom STA wireless driver = not in use. But it uses wl. I had some probelms with playing video and music, but it is working now.
So seems like everything is fixed.

[bandyo]

The partial upgrade with 2.6.24-21 did not go very well on my Acer 4420 laptop. The restricted ATI graphics driver did not load initially and gave me a white screen after logon. Once I reverted back to the generic graphics driver by booting 2.6.24-19, I found out that the restricted Broadcom WiFi driver does not load when I boot with 2.6.24-21.

Neither of the two restricted drivers are recognized by 2.6.24-21. So I am back to 2.6.24-19.

If anyone has any other solution, please share.

Thanks

[godfree2]

if the grub menu is hidden, hit esc when rebooting.

Highlight the menu entry -19 (recovery) and then press the e key.
view each line of the list,
check that the line
root (hd0,0)
is correct, 0 mean boot partition is one partition 1.
press b to boot if things look ok

once in the repair menu, select fix x
after repair select normal boot.

One in ubuntu run synaptic package manager and get envyNG, it will update, download and configure nvidia and ATI video card drivers

[godfree2]

similar on a ACER w ATI laptop I tried. You were lucky you did not have to reinstall. Sorry no solution

[godfree2]

if the grub menu is hidden, hit esc when rebooting.

Highlight the menu entry -19 (recovery) and then press the e key.
view each line of the list,
check that the line
root (hd0,0)
is correct, such as 0 means boot partition is partition 1.
press b to boot if things look ok

once in the repair menu, select fix x
after repair select normal boot.

One in ubuntu run synaptic package manager and get envyNG, it will update, download and configure nvidia and ATI video card drivers

[ohiomoto]

Doesn't anyone test these before release? We expect more quality control, instead we get screwed. How can we expect people to migrate away from M$ ?
Hey developers "get your <snip> together."I agree. I'm not a developer and I'm not qualified to deal with these issues. The -18 update did me in and I can't afford to let the -21 update kill me. I realize this is open source software, but there is a problem when a "recommended" update is a system killer.

[alexcckll]

It was a good thing I didn't accept updates this morning. Is there any idea when this is likely to be fixed - or if -21 is going to be withdrawn so the other packages are safe to pull down? Or should I just deselect the packages in Update Manager before applying?

I run a Lenovo Thinkpad r61i.

[karlmp]

i updated and everything went fine for me

why this update isn't in the Ubuntu news?

[BigSilly]

i updated and everything went fine for me

Me too. Everything went absolutely fine and I've even removed the old .24-19 kernel. I sad to hear of so many issues. :(

[ajgreeny]

i updated and everything went fine for me

why this update isn't in the Ubuntu news?
Same here, I have just this minute done it, rebooted, and it has not presented me with any problems at all, as far as I can see so far. I run an ati 9200se card with the open source driver and I don't use wireless, so that may be why I am satisfied with the new kernel, but surely people who can't get it to work can just boot into the 2.6.24-19 kernel, which will still be there.

[cejack]

Yahoo...! It worked for me.

I accepted defaults on the update. (You know the part where it gives you the "Forward" button.) I didn't use any of the fancy options or experimental options. Just the standard option. Of course I also copied a backup of my original menu.lst file before all of this, too.

I have a multi-boot setup. It installed the 21 Kernel but it didn't change my menu.lst. I just copied the standard and the recovery line items from 19 kernel into my menu.lst file. Of course change the number 19 in the line to 21 on the new lines you create in your Grub menu boot list.

Then I booted to the 21 Kernel from my Grub menu and all is well. (Running VMWare Workstation with Windows Vista Business 64 and listening to tunes on Amarok right now on an Ubuntu 64 bit workstation platform right now...)

[Riverside]

There was an oddity with today's kernel update that I haven't previously seen with any Linux installation, and I've been running Linux full time since 2002. I installed the update using the graphical Update Manager, then clicked on the reboot icon as usual and performed a warm reboot. After rebooting it was immediately apparent that all was not well - the screen was flickering, screen resolution had changed and going into System --> Preferences --> Screen Resolution, it became immediately apparent that Ubuntu was no longer detecting my monitor correctly.

However, before panicking, I decided to carry out a cold reboot and, after powering the machine down completely, waiting a minute or two then powering the machine up again, all was well.

[lionel47]

Thanks to whoever had the advice on how to reboot into -19. It worked for me and I am grateful.

My question is, how do I make -19 the default boot? I suppose I have to edit grub. How?

Update: Just got the answer to my question. Bottom line: install Startup Manager (sudo apt-get install startupmanager). If you want to read the thread, click here. (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=818177&highlight=edit+grub)

[mikewhatever]

Yahoo...! It worked for me.

I accepted defaults on the update. (You know the part where it gives you the "Forward" button.) I didn't use any of the fancy options or experimental options. Just the standard option. Of course I also copied a backup of my original menu.lst file before all of this, too.

I have a multi-boot setup. It installed the 21 Kernel but it didn't change my menu.lst. I just copied the standard and the recovery line items from 19 kernel into my menu.lst file. Of course change the number 19 in the line to 21 on the new lines you create in your Grub menu boot list.

Then I booted to the 21 Kernel from my Grub menu and all is well. (Running VMWare Workstation with Windows Vista Business 64 and listening to tunes on Amarok right now on an Ubuntu 64 bit workstation platform right now...)

Exactly my own experience, but everything was well after the reboot, nvidia, screen, etc. Now, I wonder if there is a way to reproduce the debconf part.

[malleus74]

Hi! Normally I can lurk in the forums and find how to do about everything. Today, though, I'm stuck. I'm having a similar problem as the original poster.

I allowed the "recommended" update, too, and the pc needed to reboot. It's crashed a few times since, but whenever I run synaptic, it errors with the following.

E: linux-image-2.6.24-21-generic: subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 2
E: linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.24-21-generic: dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
E: linux-image-generic: dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
E: linux-restricted-modules-2.6.24-21-generic: dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
E: linux-restricted-modules-generic: dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
E: linux-generic: dependency problems - leaving unconfigured

How do I fix this? Everything "seems" to be working hardware-wise right now, but it's almost as bad as Windows with having to reboot. I'm on a Toshiba Satellite P205d-s8804 laptop with ati graphics and atheros 5007 wifi so I really don't want to start over. A decent burning software equivalent to Nero and a Print Shop clone and I could ditch Vista completely... :)

By the way, my own two cents worth on the comments about "recommended" software. I agree that you should help test buggy software, but not with your main operating system. You can set up a dual-boot or image it. A lot of people, like me, will click on updates that say "recommended". Can we try not to do the Microsoft way and use everyone who wants to be a loyal user of your operating system as a guinea pig?

[Bloch]

I edited the text file at
/boot/grub/menu.lst

and commented out the lines that refer to the new kernel 2.6.24-21-generic, leaving the file as before with
2.6.24-21-generic

I did not uninstall the new kernel.

What I want to know is will I run into problems if I continue with the old kernel? Is it important to change to the new kernel?

(It didn't work for me, but I didn't begin the long process of figuring out why.)

[frankdn]

I edited the text file at
/boot/grub/menu.lst

What I want to know is will I run into problems if I continue with the old kernel? Is it important to change to the new kernel?


The update process does not un-install the old kernel; you should be able to boot it and run, just as before.

All you need to do is edit menu.lst, and you've already done that. As to whether it's important to run the new kernel, I've no idea. It's a minor release so should contain no new features, just bug fixes.

[godfree2]

sudo apt-get install startupmanager
also contains a bug.
I just watched it ruin a proper menu.lst

bug, startupmanager removed the AUTOMAGIC ending line in menu.lst
and it placed menu lines above ## BEGIN AUTOMAGIC ... line. Bad news.
I did this a couple of times and when startupmanager falsely stated a missing ### END DEBIAN AUTOMAGIC
I selected the fix option, startupmanager failed to fix.
startupmanager also forced use of root (hd0,0) despite root being on partition 2.

Let's hope the developers don't censor this bug and come clean with a fix.
If I don't reply assume I was censored/banned

[malleus74]

"The update process does not un-install the old kernel; you should be able to boot it and run, just as before.

All you need to do is edit menu.lst, and you've already done that."

I can try that tonight, but the grub menu doesn't actually give me the option for the .21 kernel. It still shows the .19 one. I also know it uninstalled one kernel module, though by the time it removed it, I was so annoyed at myself I never bothered to write it down... I was so worked up on having to probably reinstall. User error... ugh.

I'll also uninstall any kernel or module saying .21 through synaptic... will it be a problem to see the .19 kernel modules in Synaptic to install? Do I need to edit anything to show the older modules?

[the_maplebar]

When I updated to .21 yesterday I tried to do the 3-way merge of the menu.lst, which failed. At the end the Upgrade Manager said configuration was not completed. I manually added .21 to menu.lst and rebooted to find my NVidia drivers hosed. I tried running nvidia-xconfig and rebooting several times to no avail. Eventually I rebooted to .19 and reinstalled all of the .21 packages, I had the upgrade overwrite my menu.lst and after rebooting everything was great.:)

Just a note on the 3-way merge. Overwriting my menu.lst did not loose any of my old kernel's or my windows installation, I had commented out the 15, 16, 17 kernel which are now back in the list.

[malleus74]

How do you have the upgrade overwrite the menu.lst, and would I have to do anything to keep my current kernel module setup under .21? I'd hate to lose my atheros 5007 wifi above all... :)

[treesurf]

I have a dual boot setup so chose the default "Don't edit my menu.lst", mostly because I really didn't know what the other options were going to do. 21 did not show up in the list when I rebooted so I had to add it manually to menu.lst and reboot again. There it was, and happily everything is running fine for me so far.

[riff raff]

Hi all,

Thought I'd chime in too, with my Kubuntu upgrade to -21. Basically, I've lost the ability for thumb drives to automount. I've described the problem in more detail here:

http://kubuntuforums.net/forums/index.php?topic=3098275.0

If I open a terminal and run lsusb, the thumb drive will mount. Otherwise, it just sits there with its LED off and no new entries to syslog.

A minor problem, but annoying nonetheless.


Also, does anyone know where I can find a list of changes for this kernel version?



Thanks,

-mike

[ajgreeny]

As I said in post #19, I had no problems with this update. I was not aware of any of the business about the choice of updating the menu.lst file as I was away from the computer while the update happened and came back to find that I needed to reboot. I did so, a warm reboot, not a shutdown and restart, and all was well.

I have had none of the many problems that people seem to have had, and wonder if I'm just lucky, or did my machine accept the defaults by itself because I wasn't there, and therefore everything went without hitch.

[chrono13]

I've just received calls from two of the people I have installed Ubuntu for, and they have both lost X.

Do we have a bug number yet?

[malleus74]

I did the update through synaptic manager, and I didn't see any options at all. Maybe the setup didn't get to that point?

[chrono13]

I believe I found our bug number: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.24/+bug/283711

"package linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.24-21-generic 2.6.24-21.32 failed to install/upgrade: dependency problems - leaving unconfigured"

[russlar]

I run Kubuntu Hardy KDE4, and .21 hosed me too. Lost sound, plasma crapped out, rendered my T61 a brick. For the first time, I'm glad Ubuntu doesn't remove the old kernel when you upgrade.


You clearly don't understand the concept of open source. You are the tester. Nobody is paid for testing, people who use the software report bugs and other volunteers fix them. If you don't like this then you should switch to Windows and pay your hundreds of Euros/Dollars/Pounds/WhatNot for testing crews, who by the way, work no more efficiently than the open source community.
+1 Truth.

[alexcckll]

Hmmm - if it does that to a T61 - I'm more of a *user* of Linux.. not a guru.

*please* could developers hurry with a fix, or withdraw the -21 modules until they actually resolve the issues...

[riff raff]

<snip>

Of course "you are the tester." Just like you are if you use Microsoft or Apple or Google products. But traditionally, that's why alpha and beta levels exist; and why stable and unstable distros exist. Furthermore, in the case of Ubuntu, there's this company called Canonical Ltd...maybe you've heard of them? So there is a certain amount of paid work going on.

So, yes, I think the "average Joe" should expect a high degree of stability from an official kernel upgrade. It's not like you can't find scads of posts about things breaking with -21. Again, this was pushed to people who did not opt in to a beta program.

That said, there will always be issues; the hardware we're trying to work with is just too diverse. But to tell someone that they "don't understand open source" when you yourself are damaging FOSS with that "don't like, fix it yourself" attitude is annoying to those of us who have been involved with free software since before Linux was a gleam in Linus' eye (and likely before you started high school).

Now get off my lawn.

[himynameiskevin]

everything seems to still be working just fine for me. my restricted drivers panel is showing me a "wl" driver now, on top of the ati and broadcom drivers.

[malleus74]

I like the idea of open source software, and I greatly respect the way regular people work basically for free to give it to us.
Here's my problem. I started tinkering around with Linux when Slackware was the main disto. I've stayed one step above newbie for the next decade or so because nothing was compatible, and I didn't plan to really start learning to code just to play around / be productive each day. Dos and Windows just worked... except when it didn't. :)

Software has got a lot better for Linux, but hardware still had a long way to go until recently. Like with my current install, I had to do a lot of lurking for weeks to figure out how to get the Atheros 5007 drivers working with Mad Wifi. If I didn't have a dual-boot with Vista, I'd have gave up again.

Ubuntu has a lot of great people on the forums trying to help, and the gui is simplified enough that 'normal' people can use it for a regular OS. I think it's the first real threat to Windows, if someone works s little more with hardware detection and setup... and wine integration... and lots and lots of publicity.

One of the main issues I have with Microsoft is the their beta testing, i.e. sending updates out to crash or create security risks in everyone's systems, then figuring out the bugs. I expect more, I guess, from Ubuntu... just don't mark the updates "recommended" before you test it on a LOT of different equipement and different setup.

[Ninesvnsicks]

title Microsoft Windows XP Professional
root (hd0,0)
savedefault
makeactive
chainloader +1

title Ubuntu 8.04, kernel 2.6.24-21-generic
root (hd0,2)
kernel /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.24-21-generic root=UUID=6557d05b-d309-4911-8ccb-9d9581931242 ro quiet splash
initrd /boot/initrd.img-2.6.24-21-generic
quiet

title Ubuntu 8.04, kernel 2.6.24-21-generic (recovery mode)
root (hd0,2)
kernel /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.24-21-generic root=UUID=6557d05b-d309-4911-8ccb-9d9581931242 ro single
initrd /boot/initrd.img-2.6.24-21-generic

title Ubuntu 8.04, memtest86+
root (hd0,2)
kernel /boot/memtest86+.bin
quiet


I used the update manager to install 2.6.24.21 and told it to not monify the grub menu.lst then I copied the 19 version and jsut changed 19 to 21 and so far everything seems ok, knock on wood.

[MisterBill]

Dumb Linux enthusiast that I am, it wasn't broke, but I "fixed" it by trying the 2.6.24-21 upgrade, as suggested by Update Manager. Starting with the next reboot of my HP Pavilion DV6336 laptop, I then started to run into mucho problemos -- when the orange Ubuntu loading status bar was about 5/6th complete, it would consistently hang, with the little blue Caps Lock indicator light flashing rapidly on and off.

A reboot into 2.6.24-21 but with "Recovery Mode" also brought no joy, however at least I was able to tell what was going on -- when I originally set up this PC, the only way I was able to get my Wi-Fi working was via NDISwrapper, but this kernel -- for reasons known only to Linus Torvalds, Mark Shuttleworth and God -- seems to be (a) turning ON the Broadcom B43 driver (even after I thought that I had "blacklisted" it) and then (b) dying horribly with ominous kernel panic errors about "unhandled interrupt".

Luckily I was able to hit the ESC key on boot and get back into GRUB, thence the 2.6.4-19 kernel, which thankfully is still working OK... if it wasn't you wouldn't be reading this, but I must say I'm very disappointed in Canonical over this. I am trying to be a Linux evangelist for my friends and acquaintances but if they were to run into nonsense like this, they'd be back to Vi$ta faster than you can say "Steve Ballmer profit margin".

While I'm aware that it is community supported software, the fact that something as mission-critical as a major kernel upgrade can be pushed out the door and have it completely hang ordinary computers like mine, with a very widely distributed Wi-Fi chipset, means that something in the development process is going to have to change tout de suite if Ubuntu is going to be taken seriously as a real rival to the commercial operating systems.

It is completely disingenuous for Linux supporters to say "you're supposed to be helping us debug it". That model might work for (say) some kind of minor problem in using application software (say, in a word processor), but when the bug is at a fundamental level like this one and it can completely disable your PC before the stage at which the average user could even start to investigate the problem, it's wildly unreasonable to expect anybody but the core Ubuntu / Linux developers to be the Quality Control agents for that part of the system.

I hope they do better next time, because as we speak they may be losing a LOT of otherwise open-minded Linux users, who are fuming about "why did my !@$@#%+$^! Linux PC just stop working, all of a sudden". :confused:

PS: It's also painful to have to wait 15 minutes on each boot while trying to isolate a problem like this, because fsck always complains about an "unclean shutdown", which of course you have to do via the power button!

MisterBill

[godfree2]

I've reported bugs in -21 already, but they were ignored.
I expect we are are going to see alot of CYA (cover your donkey)
about the -21 upgrade.

A commitment must be followed by developers with recommended releases 'break not thy user's system!'

Something that still amazes me after all these years online is, why do a few people post 'it worked for me'

[Ayuthia]

I am trying to make sure that I understand what is happening. It looks like everyone here is installing the new kernel update. The problem looks like is happening when it is updating the menu for grub. Am I correct in assuming that everyone here tried the 3-way merge and then it failed? Because of this, the kernel updates failed.

I have not yet done the updates to my laptop. I am going to do this now, but it will take a while because I am on dial-up. However, I don't think I am going to run into this problem because grub is installed through Arch (I am multi-booting).

Regardless, I am thinking that there are still some linux packages that have not been updated as of yet. Is that correct? Has anyone gone into the Terminal/Konsole and checked it through aptitude:

sudo aptitude safe-upgradeIt has been a while since I have run into this, but it will either try to install the linux packages again or else it will ask to if you want to update. I am thinking that it will just try to update and will bring up the question about updating the menu for grub. If anyone wants to try, you should select that you will update it on your own. I think that will allow the system to update the linux packages that is needed for 2.6.24-21.

I could be completely wrong on this, but I recall this happening before in one of the earlier Gutsy/Hardy alphas.

Please let me know if any of my information is incorrect.

[rlogan]

I have a similar issue, did the upgrade from 2.6.24-19 to 2.6.24-21 with no problems at first. This laptop has the Atheros 5007 chipset and with every kernal upgrade I have had to install the madwifi driver.

So after upgrade the wifi wasn't working, but all booting up nicely otherwise. So I thought Ok then install Madwifi drivers ...mmmmm shouldn't have done this as it now has a kernal panic and stops dead before login screen comes up.

So its back to 2.6.24-19 for now, if anyone can think of magic to recitfy the kernal panic, tips are gratefully accepted

[ajgreeny]

Something that still amazes me after all these years online is, why do a few people post 'it worked for me'The reason I wrote something like this in my posts is simply to try to:-

a. Find out more about the reasons for the problems, by telling what I did and what hardware I run. This may give some clues about what happened in other peoples' cases, such as , is it just those with proprietary drivers and wireless setup, single vs dual-boot, etc etc, or might it be others as well.

b. To show other users that there are situations where the update worked exactly as was expected. This could help developers sort out the reasons for the problem, and give them a "control" in experimental terms, to compare with.

As an example, a few posters have commented about the option they saw regarding updating the menu.lst file. I never got that option, or if I did, I did not see it, being away from my machine whilst the update took place. Nor have I ever seen such an option on previous kernel updates, so I am trying to find out more about this.

[godfree2]

I am trying to make sure that I understand what is happening. It looks like everyone here is installing the new kernel update. The problem looks like is happening when it is updating the menu for grub. Am I correct in assuming that everyone here tried the 3-way merge and then it failed? Because of this, the kernel updates failed.

I have not yet done the updates to my laptop. I am going to do this now, but it will take a while because I am on dial-up. However, I don't think I am going to run into this problem because grub is installed through Arch (I am multi-booting).

Regardless, I am thinking that there are still some linux packages that have not been updated as of yet. Is that correct? Has anyone gone into the Terminal/Konsole and checked it through aptitude:

sudo aptitude safe-upgradeIt has been a while since I have run into this, but it will either try to install the linux packages again or else it will ask to if you want to update. I am thinking that it will just try to update and will bring up the question about updating the menu for grub. If anyone wants to try, you should select that you will update it on your own. I think that will allow the system to update the linux packages that is needed for 2.6.24-21.

I could be completely wrong on this, but I recall this happening before in one of the earlier Gutsy/Hardy alphas.

Please let me know if any of my information is incorrect.

the many attempts at the upgrade 3way-merge or clean tend to do the same.
the update wrecks
/boot/grub/menu.lst
by removing

## ## End Default Options ##
...
and moving grub menu items to the top of the file
...
### END DEBIAN AUTOMAGIC KERNELS LIST

and most times changing

root (hd0,1)
to
root (hd0,0)

and changing or creating an incorrect default grub root
## default grub root device
## e.g. groot=(hd0,0)


# groot=(hd0,0)


Startupmanager also does not fix the missing line
### END DEBIAN AUTOMAGIC KERNELS LIST

[Ayuthia]

the many attempts at the upgrade 3way-merge or clean tend to do the same.
the update wrecks
/boot/grub/menu.lst
by removing

## ## End Default Options ##
...
and moving grub menu items to the top of the file
...
### END DEBIAN AUTOMAGIC KERNELS LIST

and most times changing

root (hd0,1)
to
root (hd0,0)

and changing or creating an incorrect default grub root
## default grub root device
## e.g. groot=(hd0,0)


# groot=(hd0,0)


Startupmanager also does not fix the missing line
### END DEBIAN AUTOMAGIC KERNELS LIST

So does it still have the error:

Testing for an existing GRUB menu.lst file ... found: /boot/grub/menu.lst
Searching for splash image ... none found, skipping ...
Found kernel: /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.24-21-generic
Found kernel: /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.24-19-generic
Found kernel: /boot/memtest86+.bin
Merging changes into the new version
User postinst hook script [/sbin/update-grub] exited with value 1
dpkg: error processing linux-image-2.6.24-21-generic (--configure):
subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 1
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.24-21-generic:
linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.24-21-generic depends on linux-image-2.6.24-21-generic; however:
Package linux-image-2.6.24-21-generic is not configured yet.
dpkg: error processing linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.24-21-generic (--configure):
dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
From what I can tell, this error (snipped from the original post) is being caused from update-grub failing so linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.24-21-generic fails.

So you are saying that even if you choose to not have grub update, it will still update incorrectly and fail?

EDIT: Sorry if it looks like I am asking the same questions over and over, I am trying to figure out the workaround for update-grub. At least, that is what looks like is causing this problem.

[Ayuthia]

It looks like your problem might be related to this bug:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ucf/+bug/226708

Can you post the results of:

dpkg -l ucf

The -l is the lower-case L and not a one 1. Thanks!

[malleus74]

"As an example, a few posters have commented about the option they saw regarding updating the menu.lst file. I never got that option, or if I did, I did not see it, being away from my machine whilst the update took place. Nor have I ever seen such an option on previous kernel updates, so I am trying to find out more about this."

I never had this option, and I think it's because I use gfxboot. Maybe that's why this crashed on me... anyone else? Maybe I can make a fake /etc/grub/menu.lst, and it'll work...

I did edit my gfxboot menu.lst last night, and I can boot into .21. However, I do lose my wifi (athereos 5007) when I'm booted into it. Everything else "seemed" to work. Of course for me the laptop's useless if I can't get online, so... until this is figured out, I'm staying with .19.

[dullard]

Something that still amazes me after all these years online is, why do a few people post 'it worked for me'

Don't worry. They they tend to grow out of it ;o)

[alexcckll]

And a good thing they do too...

Speaking as a newer user - I'm nowhere near comfortable with mucking around with GRUB configs etc... this upgrade should not have been released until more testing had been done.

Is it going to be resolved soon?

[malleus74]

I guess my whole thought with Ubuntu is it's "easy". With a little work it'll be up to the level beginners can use it effectively from the start.

If I'm a complete stranger to Linux in general, and someone hands me a live cd... what am I going to do? I'll boot off it, and if it works... I might use it. That means working with networks, basic games, a good looking desktop and menu (menu still needs work just for clarity's sake), and a lot more integration with Wine. Atheros support without a tedious web search would be nice, too... couldn't a script be put together so it would just work? Changing some defaults in Samba like I've seen on some of the boards would be awesome, too.

There's so many benefits, especially as a live cd. Free, for one, and free support with the forums. It's secure from the beginning against attacks over the internet, secure from viruses, secure from trojans. Just reboot.

[Brad_au]

I agreed to the upgrade via Adept but when it got to the menu.lst (which I had previously changed) I said to leave it as it was.

Now I cannot get it to boot into 2.6.24-21 despite my attempts to re-install/reconfigure/edit menu.lst by hand. update-grub finds the new kernel but won't give it as a boot option.

Any suggestions & will this stuff up future dependencies if I keep booting to 2.6.24-19?

[Bibek]

I just updated to 2.6.24-21-generic and everything is working fine. Just to let you know I am using HP 520 laptop. So this update works in hp 520 laptop if anyone with the same model is reading this thread thinking whether to update or not.

[butterfingers]

I am using an Asus X50SL with Atheros AR242X wifi card and ATI Radeon HD3470. The upgrade went all right, and then I rebooted on the -21 kernel from Grub. I noticed I had no wifi, so I reinstalled the Madwifi driver by hand, and rebooted once more. Then I had the kernel panic. I am staying on kernel -19.

I am really disappointed. Since Hardy, I am having great trouble with Ubuntu, and my fear of upgrades is growing every day. I don't want to have to change my distro.

[malleus74]

Apparently the bug with atheros wifi and .24-21 / kernel panic is known:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-meta/+bug/278823

The main bug seems to be you HAVE to have grub installed. If not, the install crashes with dependency errors. I re-installed grub (normally using gfxboot), and reinstalled .24-21. It gave me the options to edit menu.lst, and the install went fine... well, besides no wifi.

So, if you want to do this update, make sure grub is installed, tell it not to update the menu.lst, and manually edit it if you have atheros drivers and madwifi. Boot into .24-19 for wifi.

[kosmos2121]

As for recovering from the madwifi update of the 2.6.24-21, I found that if I removed the files starting with wlan located in the folder /lib/modules/2.6.24-21-generic/net. Then reboot using 2.6.24-21 kernel option through grub. I hope this helps some of you out there. Unfortunately wifi still will not work for kernel 2.6.24-21 but at least you will be able to boot into it and if/when there is a solution you will be able to apply it.

[plamen_todoroff]

I see that a lot of the problems discussed in this thread are about "update wrecks /boot/grub/menu.lst". I expected the forum to be filled with lots of threads about the problem and official announces that a fix is coming and not to hurry and do the update to 2.6.24-21, but... none of it.

So, is this update problem happening only on certain systems, hardware combinations or something like that?

What is the cause for that menu.lst problem with the 2.6.24-21 and should I do the update? Is there something like a official anouncement or fix, or something to be done before I do the update for it to pass smooth?

Thanks.

[shredder12]

I don't know whether these problems are with certain systems or are basically creating trouble for most of the people..but after updating to the new kernel..i found my wired connection interface jst disappeared...I wasn't able to connect to internet..anymore.then some how somebody suggested me to boot with the old kernel..and after doing it .. the problem disappeared..And after reading most of the posts in this thread..one can see that the new kernel has created a lot of trouble...

[redbomber84]

Hi - I dual boot with vista and everything was running smoothly for the last month - but after I upgraded to 2.6.24-21 today - I can get ubuntu to still load but I can't get vista to run, and when I try to boot vista I get sent to a recovery mode (i'm on a lenovo thinkpad). I'm new to the Ubuntu OS and dual booting - any suggestions about how I can get vista to run again? I'm getting the blue screen of death and I'm pretty sure all I did was install 2.6.24 -21. Any suggestions would be appreciated.

[Dermot Doyle]

Hi, I've read as many threads as I could find on this because I've also suffered with the new kernel. I've tried the suggested fixes on other threads to no avail so have gone back to using the -19 kernel, which works well. As a non-computerate newbie to Linux my questions are:
Do I uninstall the -21 kernel, wait 'till the problems are sorted and then download a working, tested kernel?
Or, do I leave the -21 kernel, wait until the problems are sorted and then run on -21 and do whatever I am advised? (note. this hasn't worked so far)
Or, do I ignore the -21 kernel and wait for the one after that to be released (also waiting to see if the forum is full of people' problems before downloading it)?
Please note that I am not having a go at the developers, though the point about putting off potential Linux users is a serious one.
Cheers

[stephanvaningen]

avoid -21 !
avoid -21 !

it killed 3 installs of mine!

Doesn't anyone test these before release? We expect more quality control, instead we get screwed. How can we expect people to migrate away from M$ ?
Hey developers "get your <snip> together."

If you find it important you can join the test-community :-)
or at least provide some more motivating feedback to the large group of volunteers,
regards,

[malleus74]

"So, is this update problem happening only on certain systems, hardware combinations or something like that?"

My problems showed up because:
a: I am using gfxboot instead of grub, and apparently the .24-21 update doesn't have an option for that.
b: I'm using Madwifi with atheros 5007 drivers, and .24-21 is known to have a problem with that (I posted the bug above)
c: They released this kernel as a "recommended" update.
d: I made newbie mistake #1 and didn't back up my system first.

and for Stevenvaningen...

I can see you're active in the forums. I'm sure that's appreciated. In my earlier post I made sure to say I appreciate the efforts of the developers. Ubuntu wouldn't be here without them. I'm sorry if you think we're griping for no reason, but this is my (and I'm sure almost everyone's) point: Ubuntu is supposed to be "easy" compared to the other distros. I expect Microsoft to use us all as beta testers... I expect more from Ubuntu.

In this case, a kernel update was put out as "recommended" when they knew it had problems with a good many systems. A newbie, and I qualify even though I've played around with Linux almost since the beginning, is going to click "ok" and go along with a "recommended" update.

This isn't a random issue with rare software / hardware. Have nvidia drivers? It might mess you up. Need to use Madwifi? It might mess you up. Dual boot? It might mess you up. Use anything but grub? The install will mess up with a dependency issue.

All I really want is to get the point across: please don't "recommend" an update unless it's really, really been tested on a variety of systems. Or, have the update look for certain packages just like it does for dependencies, and put up a warning not to update.

Again, I apologize if I seem frustrated,... but I am. I'm really trying to support Ubuntu and get away from dual-booting. To the developers: please let me do it.

[jbman]

Lost video on my machine, so i rolled back

[alexcckll]

I agree with Malleus above... I am your putative newbie to Linux - I bought my machine preinstalled, and would not have a clue where to start if I had to resolve problems without Internet access... which I would have lost (or would have been risking losing) if I had accepted that update.

Currently, I switched off the Recommended options in Software Sources - so I only pick up critical updates for the time being.

There are more people like me buying machines preinstalled.. and who would have no option but to send them back if they didn't start. Point taken - you can boot to a Last Known Good - but how stable is that after half the OS has been replaced?

I'm an email admin professionally (XP and Notes) - I like Ubuntu on this THinkpad...

[yellowman]

Lost video on my machine, so i rolled back

Same here. :-|

[godfree2]

If you find it important you can join the test-community :-)
or at least provide some more motivating feedback to the large group of volunteers,
regards,

I am a linux volunteer and have been for some time.
You swung.
You missed.

[PC_load_letter]

I did the updrade yesterday (10/19) using update manager. Everything seemed to have gone fine. Restarted, but then nothing!!! There is no grub entry for the new kernel 2.6.24-21, and I am still on 2.6.24-19 as of now with no problems of course. I am on amd64 Ubuntu 8.04 btw.

Now, when I go to Synaptic, I see that the new kernel (2.6.24-21) along with the respective restricted modules are marked as installed!!?

Anyone knows what happened here?

[malleus74]

"Now, when I go to Synaptic, I see that the new kernel (2.6.24-21) along with the respective restricted modules are marked as installed!!? "

I would recommend leaving the .24-19 kernel and modules alone for the sec, system-wise and in grub. Manually edit your menu.lst file, copy the .24-19 info, and change the .24-19 to .24-21.

You might want to do a full system backup, just in case. Do a search on the forums and there's a really handy guide to it, if you have the space. This was my mistake.

At this point, just be warned if you have nvidia graphics, athereos wireless, or any of the other issues you see in this thread.

[PC_load_letter]

"Now, when I go to Synaptic, I see that the new kernel (2.6.24-21) along with the respective restricted modules are marked as installed!!? "

I would recommend leaving the .24-19 kernel and modules alone for the sec, system-wise and in grub. Manually edit your menu.lst file, copy the .24-19 info, and change the .24-19 to .24-21.

You might want to do a full system backup, just in case. Do a search on the forums and there's a really handy guide to it, if you have the space. This was my mistake.

At this point, just be warned if you have nvidia graphics, athereos wireless, or any of the other issues you see in this thread.

So what you are saying is that I should anticipate problems? I have none so far.
What I find surprising is that even the generic kernel and restricted module component of the 2.6.24-21 kernel are installed, as it shows in Synaptic, Grub doesn't have an entry for the new kernel, as if the upgrade never happened!
I do have the Nvidia 8400GS gpu but so far nothing has changed.

Thanks.

[Handssolow]

Similar experiences here with the -19 to -21 update which I've just done after being away for a few days.

Updating my PC AMD 64 with 32 bit Ubuntu generic on a IDE HD, I selected to keep my existing menu.lst. It's not because it's a dual boot system but because for most of this year I have to add acpi=noirq to the kernel line to get it to boot. Incidentally the reason for this is still a mystery to me, especially as if I connect 64 bit Ubuntu on a Sata it boots OK with no kernel line modifications. Following the update menu.lst did not add the -21 kernel nether did running grub-update, so I was still with -19. After I manually edited menu.lst changing -19 to -21 I've finally got 2.6.24-21-generic. After I log off from here I'll make it permanent.

My wife's PC AMD Athlon 386 dual HD Ubuntu/XP was left to updated itself which it did successfully. I saw no option to keep menu.lst and XP hasn't been removed from menu.lst so I guess we can still dual boot without a problem.

[Nxion]

I have the same issue with my laptop. After I upgraded the the latest kernel (2.6.24-21-generic) and now when I boot up it halts the system and gives me a kernel panic. If I restart and choose the 19 kernel, all is well. I did some research and found that it might be my wireless card that is the issue. I have a Atheros based card. Also while researching I found this on launchpad. I hope it helps some people as it helped me.

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/284845 (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/284845)

[malleus74]

"So what you are saying is that I should anticipate problems? I have none so far. "

Well, isn't it a problem that the update didn't show up for you in grub?

Of course, I am one of the people having problems with the update. Plus, three or four extra lines in menu.lst doesn't hurt until you're sure how the kernel is going to react with your system.

To Nxion: I posted a similar bug earlier in the thread. Gratz! Doesn't it make you wonder why an update is marked "recommended" when it has known problems with nvidia (no video), atheros wifi (kernel panic and/or no wifi), and can't install without grub (dependency issues)?

Again, I do appreciate the people that work hard on all these packages... but I don't get this update. This really should still be experimental. We're still waiting for an answer... anyone?

[alexcckll]

It needs saying that as I understand it - the four release areas are -backports, -proposed, -update and -security, aren't they?

Umm - how about a -modeloffice area between -proposed and -update? Would match the model I know at work of...

Dev (unit/package testing)
Model Office (system testing - people here simulate what newbies would do and trap bugs missed by Dev)
Production (live servers - Recommended and Security)

Everything is tested till it breaks in model-office, and only when it passes the most rigorous system testing does it get scheduled into Prod. While "Does this package behave in isolation" is found in Dev, tests like "Does this release (all the relevant packages and dependencies) break anything else?" are done in model-office.

Just a thought.

[selehka]

Ok - I'm a lurker. I spend most of my time in the search panel to find answers, and usually locate them. I chose Hardy because it was supposed to be more user friendly.

First - I'm brand new to Linux. So fed up with Windows XP that I not only downloaded a cd, I ordered one in case I got it wrong on the download. This leaves me a live cd to use while I share my sent copy.

Second - I love Linux even though I'm thoroughly intimidated by it. Command lines, terminal - all put me in a state of panic over messing up my computer. I have Windows XP to thank for that paranoia. I was about to uninstall Windows and go completely Linux when the problems showed up.

Third - No clue what packages I really need, so tendency to add if it sounds like it meets my requirements. If an upgrade is recommended - I do it. Unlike Windows which sends me searching for hours to find out if I really should do the upgrade or not. So of course, I've been trying to figure out what I added that screwed it all up. o.0

Needless to say - Hardy has been freezing up, crashing and a nightmare to work with lately. I did notice this after I got a new menu item for booting using -21. Didn't notice 2 Hardy's before in my boot list. Never had a problem with -19. Was basically in tears that I'd have to go back to Windows because I couldn't seem to find a fix for my problem. I will now try booting onto -19 and see if I get stability back.

Pleassssssssssssssssssse don't make me use Windows again!!!:(

[Nxion]

Well I was able to get my machine back up. It was the wireless that was causing it to kernel panic. What I did is I disabled the wireless in the bios(just turning off the kill switch won't work) then I was able to successfully boot into the 2.6.24-21-generic kernel. The next step I did was remove "ath_pci" from /etc/modules. Once I did that I stated from scratch with the drivers. I just did theses steps (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=942195) which I wrote. After that I rebooted, I enabled the wireless in the bios and all is well. I can boot into the new kernel. Hope this helps.

[Nxion]

Ok - I'm a lurker. I spend most of my time in the search panel to find answers, and usually locate them. I chose Hardy because it was supposed to be more user friendly.

First - I'm brand new to Linux. So fed up with Windows XP that I not only downloaded a cd, I ordered one in case I got it wrong on the download. This leaves me a live cd to use while I share my sent copy.

Second - I love Linux even though I'm thoroughly intimidated by it. Command lines, terminal - all put me in a state of panic over messing up my computer. I have Windows XP to thank for that paranoia. I was about to uninstall Windows and go completely Linux when the problems showed up.

Third - No clue what packages I really need, so tendency to add if it sounds like it meets my requirements. If an upgrade is recommended - I do it. Unlike Windows which sends me searching for hours to find out if I really should do the upgrade or not. So of course, I've been trying to figure out what I added that screwed it all up. o.0

Needless to say - Hardy has been freezing up, crashing and a nightmare to work with lately. I did notice this after I got a new menu item for booting using -21. Didn't notice 2 Hardy's before in my boot list. Never had a problem with -19. Was basically in tears that I'd have to go back to Windows because I couldn't seem to find a fix for my problem. I will now try booting onto -19 and see if I get stability back.

Pleassssssssssssssssssse don't make me use Windows again!!!:(

I am pretty sure if you boot into the -19 kernel, all will be well. I understand the frustration. I did some research and it seems that there is quite a few bug reports that have ben submitted in regards to this issue with the latest kernel (2.6.24-21). So on your system, do you have a wireless card? Nvidia video card? or a Intel network interface card? All that I have listed seems to have issues with the lates kernel release. Can you do this for me please and post it.


lspci


Thanks

[lionel47]

Can anyone tell us what the benefits of the new kernel are? This might help us to understand whether it is worth the time to upgrade and debug.

Otherwise, is there any harm is operating under -19 until the next upgrade?

[Nxion]

Can anyone tell us what the benefits of the new kernel are? This might help us to understand whether it is worth the time to upgrade and debug.

Otherwise, is there any harm is operating under -19 until the next upgrade?

Well after some looking, I found this. I believe this is it.

https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/hardy/+source/linux/2.6.24-21.42 (https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/hardy/+source/linux/2.6.24-21.42)

[malleus74]

Selehka, I'm with you! I was a lurker until this thread. My biggest stumbling block has been trying to 'replace' my Windows system without losing functionality. I'm about 45% of the way there. I'm thinking of doing a lot of 'brainstorm' posts soon... lol.

Anyway, back to topic. I know there's been a lot of posts, but just look over the hardware others have problems with, before trusting this kernel. Off the top of my head nvidia graphics, atheros wifi... and of course dependency issues if you're not running grub.

Nxion, glad you got your system working! Can you repost the links to the bugs you've seen on this current page for someone only now showing up to the thread?

[roro100]

Lost video on my machine, so i rolled back

I don't know what grafics you have, but I lost my video at first too.
I htought of going back to 19, but I spent a few hours experimenting and trying to get my fglrx back. First it seemed that the upgrade erased it. And it did or corrupted it. I could not see it. My video showed a Mesa driver (no acceleratoin). I have ATI 3400 series graphics. So I installed first throuhg Synaptic Envy, tried it, it installed ATI driver that did not work. I uninstalled it. Then installedfglrx-control-envy,
which made reappear my ATI restricted driver in Restricted drvier and made my video to work, but the video clips were flickering and i was not happy with that, although I got back my screen resolution. So I uninstalled fglrx-control-envy, and installed fresh fglrx-control, now I could enable it in Restricted drivers and everthing was back to norm.

My system is: Dell Studio 15 laptop with ATI 3465? HD card, and Broadcom BCM4312 wireless.

My wireless was using wl driver before the upgrade, and then it disappered in my restricted drivers after the upgrade.
But when I do lshw, it gives me the wl driver for my wireless. So I am happy and it was working after the upgrade, but just could not find my port. So I restared my router and it found its ip. And I could connect to my WPA enabled routed. Before router reboot I could connect only to unsecured routers in my building.

So try these steps, and hopefully this will help.

[alexcckll]

I've posted the following brainstorm doc - http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/14802/

[malleus74]

+1 on brainstorm and a thanks here. We need to get this idea through their heads whatever method is used.

[alexcckll]

Agreed - it appears to be the classic disconnect between how developers and support bods think.

Ubuntu has really hot developers, but there needs to be the awareness from the end-user side..

And we are getting there; would be good to get to leverage the robustness of the OS as a whole.. and be a true alternative...

[godfree2]

yes classic disconnect,
CYA
I've tried the update on four very different machines and it kills them; this is not rare instance.
Still -21 has not been removed or replaced,
how much more computer carnage will it take?
M$ is laughing it up.

[alexcckll]

I've lost count of the number of times I've heard developers say the same thing...

"Oh - just apply this quick patch and workaround..." NO! If it causes a problem, BACK OUT THE CHANGE! Go back to a working Production environment, chuck the code back at the developers.. into APPDEV, and tell them to do it again!

I am REALLY annoyed with that "Oh - there's normally a sticky with a workaround for people.." attitude.. THat's not good enough for trusting users...

Hell - I get this **** at work as well! Or used to with *some* developers. If it weren't for a REALLY strict Release Management team..

Oh - Linux Emporium aren't all that impressed with the Ubuntu kernel devs.. UNIDs for discs blew out disaster recovery plans...

[alexcckll]

Oh - found a good piece that hits the points I was making - http://freshmeat.net/articles/view/306/

[bandyo]

I just saw a new 2.6.24-21 in the update! This time it is labeled "Important Security Update" not "Recommended." I lte it install on a machine that didn't have any problem with the last one and it went fine. That is, the machine booted up with restricted graphics enabled. This one has only a LAN card and mo problem there.

Has anyone tried this one yet?

[puttingau]

I had a bit of trouble after the last one so am watching this thread first...did your second upgrade make a new menu item in grub?

[bandyo]

With this box, the first update went fine, including adding the grub menu. So it already had a menu item. But I was watching the update details and it said it successfully changed the grub menu while updating for the second time.

[yellowman]

I've lost count of the number of times I've heard developers say the same thing...

"Oh - just apply this quick patch and workaround..." NO! If it causes a problem, BACK OUT THE CHANGE! Go back to a working Production environment, chuck the code back at the developers.. into APPDEV, and tell them to do it again!

I am REALLY annoyed with that "Oh - there's normally a sticky with a workaround for people.." attitude.. THat's not good enough for trusting users...

Hell - I get this **** at work as well!

Amen to that!

[alexcckll]

I just saw a new 2.6.24-21 in the update! This time it is labeled "Important Security Update" not "Recommended." I lte it install on a machine that didn't have any problem with the last one and it went fine. That is, the machine booted up with restricted graphics enabled. This one has only a LAN card and mo problem there.

Has anyone tried this one yet?
Might be an idea to hold off for a bit...

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/290130/

I've subscribed to this one.. and https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/290113

People are talking about removing and reapplying packages... surely this sequencing needs to be sorted BEFORE the bloody packages are released!

[alexcckll]

I've added some notes to those active bugs - advising that a LOT of people are scared to accept updates until this sequencing issue have bene resolved...

[Mark224]

I also had a problem with 2.6.24-21 which caused a white screen when I tried to log in. As a newbie to Ubuntu I do not know what to do if this happens. I can run OK with the older kernel but this does make me worried when a recommended update breaks my system.

[mohitchawla]

There were no issues when the first -21 update was issued. However, when it was listed in the security updates today, it gave similar errors as posted in the first post about dependencies et al.

My ONLY concern now is, will it be possible to upgrade to Ibex with such a system state ?

[lionel47]

I've been running Ibex on a virtual machine to test out hardware issues. So far so good...even the wireless worked with no tweaking. I probably will wait three or four weeks after it is released and monitor the boards to see if any problems come out. After that, I will upgrade or, more likely, do a new install since my /home is on its own partition.

[Zimmer]

Hi - I dual boot with vista and everything was running smoothly for the last month - but after I upgraded to 2.6.24-21 today - I can get ubuntu to still load but I can't get vista to run, and when I try to boot vista I get sent to a recovery mode (i'm on a lenovo thinkpad). I'm new to the Ubuntu OS and dual booting - any suggestions about how I can get vista to run again? I'm getting the blue screen of death and I'm pretty sure all I did was install 2.6.24 -21. Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Hope these links help
http://neosmart.net/blog/2008/windows-vista-recovery-disc-download/

http://neosmart.net/wiki/display/EBCD/Repairing+the+Windows+Vista+Bootloader

http://neosmart.net/wiki/display/EBCD/EasyBCD+Documentation+Home

Looks a good place to start.
I use EasyBCD to dual boot with Vista (preinstalled) so I have GRUB installed on the Ubuntu partition and EasyBCD points to it (for want of a technical explanation).
The kernel update threw a wobbler for me with X and nvidia, so have gone back to the -19 until I find out how to sort it.

EDIT: Sorted! Tried manually removing and re installing nvidia-glx-new via Synaptic. No go, but the driver package there is 169. Found an Ibex post refering to nvidia problem and the need for build 173.
So, installed EnvyNG. Removed Nvidia driver using that, rebooted, and it booted using the nv module, then used EnvyNG to install the 173 build. reboot. SUCCESS! Thank you Alberto Milone!

[45acp]

I was thinking to apply the -21 upgrade but I believe I will play it safe and stay with the -19 kernel for now after reading this tread.

[bandyo]

I also had a problem with 2.6.24-21 which caused a white screen when I tried to log in. As a newbie to Ubuntu I do not know what to do if this happens. I can run OK with the older kernel but this does make me worried when a recommended update breaks my system.


I had the same problem with my laptop. I went back to the older kernel and disabled the restricted graphic driver. Then the white screen problem is gone and I could boot with the new kernel. However, my restricted wifi driver was also hosed with the new kernel. So I decided to keep using the old kernel for now.

I used the "Startup Manager" (installed using synaptic) to set the default boot to the old kernel. Then I uninstalled the new kernel using the Synaptic.

Somewhere along all this something is still messed up. I cannot enable the restricted graphic driver (ATI) now with the old kernel. When I try this, it seems to work and I get a restart required box. But it remains disabled after restart.

Hope this helps.

[malleus74]

"Oh - found a good piece that hits the points I was making - http://freshmeat.net/articles/view/306/"

"I also had a problem with 2.6.24-21 which caused a white screen when I tried to log in. As a newbie to Ubuntu I do not know what to do if this happens. I can run OK with the older kernel but this does make me worried when a recommended update breaks my system."

Ok... first, alexcckll, I think you're becoming a great advocate for the larger problem... the viewpoint that users ARE the problem. It's OUR faults our machines no longer work because we installed the updates without researching the software, comparing the versions, looking up bug reports, creating a test system, etc...

I am NOT a tester by choice.

On the testing side, though... I DID install the new "security update" last night. My menu.lst is getting to be an entire screen long... the update goes to a plain white screen with a black mouse pointer. No other parts of the gui.

.24-19 generic still works fine, so I'm still using it... I'm thinking of imaging the partition, and starting over with intrepid just to see if it'll work... I just hate to have to fight though getting madwifi working again...

Edit: I'll try the new fix listed above for the graphics... but does anyone see a pattern here? Install a "recommended" update, or a "important security update", and your system's hosed. Also, I forgot to mention it but I read that link I quoted above... please, everyone, read this article! It shows the problem so clearly!!!!!!

[RobOrr]

just thought I'd highlight my problem with .21 - nothing went wrong with my menu.lst, I didn't receive any notification about the three way merge thing either, as far as I recall. However, odd things occurred, such as all my firefox bookmarks disappearing, not being allowed to create firefox bookmarks, not being able to click the shutdown button, and so on. even more intriguingly, booting into .19 did not solve these problems. until i removed .21 via synaptic, these problems continued. My WiFi worked fine throughout all of this.

[ohiomoto]

As I stated way back on page 1 or 2, I had similar issues when I upgraded to the -19 kernel. This made me hesitant to take the -21 upgrade when it first came across as a "recommended" update.

Well, today the -21 update came as an "Important" update (or however they phrase it) and I took it. First, I did the important updates, rebooted and then did the "recommended" updates. No problems...Everything works fine.

The only issue I have is that VMware won't launch, but I think that's because the program has to be compiled on the new kernel. (Though it won't run on -19 either??) I'm still learning the ropes with Linux and VMware.

I too think Ubuntu is really close to being ready for mainstream use. I honestly thought is was (as long as the right hardware is used) until I had a failed update. In all honesty, I think there might be too many kernel updates for it's own good. As mentioned before, Ubuntu needs a little better hardware support and a few less "problematic" updates and it could work for anyone.



*For the record, I'm running a Dell Vostro 1400 dual core with NVIDIA graphics and an Intel wireless card.

[alexcckll]

Well I was able to get my machine back up. It was the wireless that was causing it to kernel panic. What I did is I disabled the wireless in the bios(just turning off the kill switch won't work) then I was able to successfully boot into the 2.6.24-21-generic kernel. The next step I did was remove "ath_pci" from /etc/modules. Once I did that I stated from scratch with the drivers. I just did theses steps (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=942195) which I wrote. After that I rebooted, I enabled the wireless in the bios and all is well. I can boot into the new kernel. Hope this helps.

Nxion, have you communicated that back to the developers? Just that the "do these steps after accepting an official update" really doesn't cut the mustard.

Also - what machine do you have?

For the record, I caled Linux Emporium (my vendor) today - they suggested I uncheck the -21 stuff before accepting updates...

Canonical - WHEN are you going to withdraw this kernel and roll back to -19 in the repos until it's fixed?

[alexcckll]

I don't know what grafics you have, but I lost my video at first too.
I htought of going back to 19, but I spent a few hours experimenting and trying to get my fglrx back. First it seemed that the upgrade erased it. And it did or corrupted it. I could not see it. My video showed a Mesa driver (no acceleratoin). I have ATI 3400 series graphics. So I installed first throuhg Synaptic Envy, tried it, it installed ATI driver that did not work. I uninstalled it. Then installedfglrx-control-envy,
which made reappear my ATI restricted driver in Restricted drvier and made my video to work, but the video clips were flickering and i was not happy with that, although I got back my screen resolution. So I uninstalled fglrx-control-envy, and installed fresh fglrx-control, now I could enable it in Restricted drivers and everthing was back to norm.

My system is: Dell Studio 15 laptop with ATI 3465? HD card, and Broadcom BCM4312 wireless.

My wireless was using wl driver before the upgrade, and then it disappered in my restricted drivers after the upgrade.
But when I do lshw, it gives me the wl driver for my wireless. So I am happy and it was working after the upgrade, but just could not find my port. So I restared my router and it found its ip. And I could connect to my WPA enabled routed. Before router reboot I could connect only to unsecured routers in my building.

So try these steps, and hopefully this will help.


Again - have you communicated this back?

THIS is the reason why we desperately need an -RC or -prerelease repo...

People who WANT to dig out these bugs CAN...

This is the type of stuff that should be in a -meta package for each major laptop type.. and in the final post-install scripts...

Also - it's a bit messy when you have to reboot your router for your laptop to find it...

Canonical and Devs... PLEASE do proper QA next time!

[alexcckll]

"Oh - found a good piece that hits the points I was making - http://freshmeat.net/articles/view/306/"

"I also had a problem with 2.6.24-21 which caused a white screen when I tried to log in. As a newbie to Ubuntu I do not know what to do if this happens. I can run OK with the older kernel but this does make me worried when a recommended update breaks my system."

Ok... first, alexcckll, I think you're becoming a great advocate for the larger problem... the viewpoint that users ARE the problem. It's OUR faults our machines no longer work because we installed the updates without researching the software, comparing the versions, looking up bug reports, creating a test system, etc...

I am NOT a tester by choice.

Oh - comes from approx 11 years as a second-line tech support bod... I've done my share of screaming at developers who tried to fob off a bodge-job to get a user up and running. The endless "No - I want a PROPER fix put in. No. Listen to me. This is NOT fixed until IT DOESN'T HAPPEN AGAIN. NO YOU ARE NOT GOING TO PATCH PRODUCTION. WHAT? OVER MY DEAD BODY!".

I've had the odd vague change request coming in.. which I knocked back... I've seen it all.

And when netbooks are being sold in MOBILE PHONE dealerships as freebies... we just can't afford for this to continue...

Thanks for the compliment though.

Operationally - I am a Lotus Notes 2nd line admin and 2nd line desktop support. If Notes was running on Unix - I have Unix admins to look after the actual boxes that Domino is running on. (At work, we're Wintel - but we have W2K3 admins who handle the kit.. and I have a 3rd line team on messaging that I refer up to).

When it comes to Linux - I am still a beginner. So - I rely on the distribution devs, testers and Release Management team to ensure that the bugfixes and updates that are queued up for my machine won't break something.

Which they have failed at over this kernel.

A Postfix admin shouldn't be expected to know how the kernel or X.org is put together... they administer mail.

Same here.. and you WILL have people relying on kit as appliances.

GET IT RIGHT!

[Bloch]

For many users the "breakdown" caused by the recent kernel upgrade were anticipated by developers.

If you need to compile drivers into the kernel to achieve hardware compatibility, the new kernel will lose these drivers. This is not a secret.

An admin advised me thus:

When using the driver manually from nvidia site and there's an update/patch it will "break" the system. It's because you build the driver for the previous kernel. So you have to build the driver against the new kernel. It's the same way that you install the driver the last time.

Similarly, the Ubuntu community website on Acer laptops https://help.ubuntu.com/community/AspireOne

Every time there is a kernel update you will need to perform the following steps to make the wireless work.
(There follows a sequence of terminal commands.)

Other examples of other drivers can be given.

Currently, the situation is that the developers releasing these kernel updates assume every user has kept note of what drivers he/she had to compile (or 'build' )into the kernel, and has made note of the steps and commands involved to reinstall those drivers.

I think this is putting too much of a load on the user. These updates came marked as recommended, with no warning attached.

For many users this is not a bug, it is a feature of the system. A bug report would be ignored by the developer.

[alexcckll]

For many users the "breakdown" caused by the recent kernel upgrade were anticipated by developers.

If you need to compile drivers into the kernel to achieve hardware compatibility, the new kernel will lose these drivers. This is not a secret.

An admin advised me thus:


Similarly, the Ubuntu community website on Acer laptops https://help.ubuntu.com/community/AspireOne
.
(There follows a sequence of terminal commands.)

Other examples of other drivers can be given.

Currently, the situation is that the developers releasing these kernel updates assume every user has kept note of what drivers he/she had to compile (or 'build' )into the kernel, and has made note of the steps and commands involved to reinstall those drivers.

I think this is putting too much of a load on the user. These updates came marked as recommended, with no warning attached.

For many users this is not a bug, it is a feature of the system. A bug report would be ignored by the developer.
Bloch,

Not good enough - especially if Ubuntu came preinstalled.

It's still an Incident, in the ITIL sense of the word. Actually, in work's terms (we use Problem where ITIL use "Incident") it would be a Severity 1 Incident if it was rolled out across an enterprise. Our Release Management team's heads would roll.. and us in first and second line would be the first in the lynch mob...

I agree with you - this may have been a suitable assumption back in the late 90s, when Linux was still very much a niche system... but not now. Now that it's been reviewed in mainstream computing mags, and Dell ae planning on shipping Hardy on their new netbook... Dell Inspiron Mini 9 running Hardy (http://www1.euro.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/laptop-inspiron-9?c=uk&cs=ukdhs1&l=en&s=dhs)

Ubuntu need Usability and Pre-release testers... they're serving a trusting end-user community now... and preinstall users won't have an earthly chance of resolving the issue if an update bricks their primary machine...

Annoying, isn't it...

Oh - re that admin's comments... what if the VENDOR had applied that driver as a delta?

And I remember some developer being short with me on bug 290113 - "The current report is most likely due to a corrupted system map and a
breakage in depmod, not the kernel. This system map can be corrupted for
many reasons (error during the map buid, corrupted fs, not enough space
on device, ...) but has nothing to do with the stability of 2.6.24-21 or
any version of the kernel."

To which I would reply - "I don't care where the bug is. I can't reliably trust my updates.. FIX IT PLEASE!".

The bug report went on with someone having to rerun Depmod etc... why should the update process clean up after itself? Would have been caught IF there had been a change freeze and UAT area...

You're right - today's Linux user CANNOT be expected to keep a log of every change against their system...

[Proton Soup]

OK, i just did an update about 3 or 4 hours ago that required a restart. only thing is i waited until just a few minutes ago to actually restart. during that time i didn't install any software, just running a mail client and using the web browser.

so... i downloaded a text file from THIS forum, tried to open it in Firefox instead of saving, and i get a message that the associated helper application is not available. but opening a text file from the desktop starts up gedit, no problem. so, something in the very latest update broke firefox associations.

i restarted. no change.

also, checking my system for updates, i got an error once. i tried to paste it here, but it wouldn't paste. on recheck, the error is gone. is the update server malfunctioning?

[alexcckll]

As for recovering from the madwifi update of the 2.6.24-21, I found that if I removed the files starting with wlan located in the folder /lib/modules/2.6.24-21-generic/net. Then reboot using 2.6.24-21 kernel option through grub. I hope this helps some of you out there. Unfortunately wifi still will not work for kernel 2.6.24-21 but at least you will be able to boot into it and if/when there is a solution you will be able to apply it.

Kosmos - have you communicated this back to the devs?

](*,)](*,)

We shouldn't be fixing this! It should have been fixed as part of a bloody Release Candidate!

[malleus74]

Step 1, we need to keep any threads connected to these problems connected. Small threads won't catch the attention we need. I connected one earlier... can anyone else join the scavenger hunt?

Step 2, we need to link these posts over to the bug reports, and maybe see if they'll offer some responses, suggestions.. hopefully anything but the old "well, you can go to the commandline and recompile..." "join the testing team" "linux isn't an easy os" , and then post them or links to them here.

I want to help the developers. I really do. I just didn't join up for testing on a system that I actually am trying to depend on. That's for a different partition,... something other than your base system. So, what do they need to help them help us?

I'm willing to do a fix on the command line for the problem so I have temporary use of the new kernel, but... come on. I could keep a list of everything I do to the system, but that'll be a lot more work.

alexcckll: Until recently I was a production control analyst for a fairly well-known company. I monitored IBM mainframes, mostly, and a little cisco, as/400, redhat.. whatever fell through the cracks..., but again 98% MVS /JES2.

This company only used one system for ALL their production across the nation. Could you imagine this mindset in 'real' production environment?

I could look at this from a technical standpoint... and I know they're working hard,... but I'm trying hard not to look at it that way. That's the whole point.

This is a distro that's supposed to be a user's distro. A normal user should NEVER have to go to the command line. A normal user should be able to have nicely gui'd tools that are easy. Click this, go here, done,... if there's any interaction at all. The 'real' command line tools are still there, but this is the way to get new users.

I really think Ubuntu has the best chance I've ever seen with Linux to become mainstream. We can do this, and on the way give Microft's users a real alternative.

[alexcckll]

This company only used one system for ALL their production across the nation. Could you imagine this mindset in 'real' production environment?


I'm trying not to. Which is why I'm livid; I, like you, am applying what i would do in work to this.. and I was *horrified* by the "-proposed is connected to production" comments..

IT'S A DEVELOPMENT DOMAIN! SANDBOXED OFF FROM PRODUCTION - OR IT BLOODY WELL SHOULD BE!

Hence - I'm keeping an eye just like i do with Enhancement Requests and Change Requests I raise off problem tickets I receive...

Actually - it feels as though I could be wearing a Plantronics headset right now... arguing with Project Support Officers and dev managers...

IF ONLY the mindset would be MORE like you and I know at work...

[jgajito]

Lost video on my machine, so i rolled back

I didn't lose my video, but the resolution had no other options than 640 x 480...:mad:

I tried many different drivers for my NVIDIA... Legacy, New, and the Regular one(non-legacy, non-new)... still no results to regain my higher resolution like it was when I first installed. I just installed this on Friday.

So I wiped it out completely and re-installed... and I get the update again... should I try it again or leave it alone?

If I do update to the new kernel... how do I rollback without having to re-install?

Thanks in advance.
-J

[alexcckll]

I didn't lose my video, but the resolution had no other options than 640 x 480...:mad:

I tried many different drivers for my NVIDIA... Legacy, New, and the Regular one(non-legacy, non-new)... still no results to regain my higher resolution like it was when I first installed. I just installed this on Friday.

So I wiped it out completely and re-installed... and I get the update again... should I try it again or leave it alone?

If I do update to the new kernel... how do I rollback without having to re-install?

Thanks in advance.
-J
Leave well alone for the time being. Uncheck anything referencing -21 (you on Hardy?)...

What model of machine do you have.. and could you pipe lspci etc to text files? Malleus - do you want to talk to the techs and get back in touch with the users.. or shall we get people attaching a standard set of files to here.. and somehow get comms going to the devs?

Not so much hjow to fix the issue - but make/model/type of machine, Ubuntu version, and a possible breakdown?

Thoughts?

[Zimmer]

I didn't lose my video, but the resolution had no other options than 640 x 480...:mad:

I tried many different drivers for my NVIDIA... Legacy, New, and the Regular one(non-legacy, non-new)... still no results to regain my higher resolution like it was when I first installed. I just installed this on Friday.

So I wiped it out completely and re-installed... and I get the update again... should I try it again or leave it alone?

If I do update to the new kernel... how do I rollback without having to re-install?

Thanks in advance.
-J

If you installed 3D NVIDIA drivers then you need to uninstall and reinstall after a kernel update. See my post #96 earlier, I edited it when I found out how to sort the NVIDIA drivers.
Hope that helps.

[malleus74]

Has any developers actually responded yet to anyone's requests for a response?

Has anyone actually had any luck with getting the .24-21 kernel working for each of these problems, even with a convoluted fix? I see nvidia has a workaround... how about wifi?

At this point I'm getting close to imaging this partition, and starting with a clean install.

[jgajito]

Leave well alone for the time being. Uncheck anything referencing -21 (you on Hardy?)...

What model of machine do you have.. and could you pipe lspci etc to text files? Malleus - do you want to talk to the techs and get back in touch with the users.. or shall we get people attaching a standard set of files to here.. and somehow get comms going to the devs?

Not so much hjow to fix the issue - but make/model/type of machine, Ubuntu version, and a possible breakdown?

Thoughts?

ASUS P4B Petium 4 2.6 GHz
2 GB RAM
80 GB HD WD
3COM 3C905B
NVIDIA 6400
Everything else is onboard(audio, modem, etc...)

This is an experiment for me anyways, so I'm also researching thin clients. So I am currently re-installing with EdUbuntu and will be using laptops(Pentium 4 Mobile CPU) for Thin Clients. I understand the developments of Linux and the ups and downs of updates, so no worries. I'll be presenting a Thin Cient/Mainframe Network to a client for later and will probably use EdUbuntu and LTSP for the Apps Server.

I'll be surfing the forums for all the help I can get and the advice. I should have checked in before updating... but for now I'll be researching more.

Thanks again for the advice and help.

[malleus74]

"Malleus - do you want to talk to the techs and get back in touch with the users.. or shall we get people attaching a standard set of files to here.. and somehow get comms going to the devs?

Not so much how to fix the issue - but make/model/type of machine, Ubuntu version, and a possible breakdown?

Thoughts?"

hmm.

I think the developers are aware of the issues we're talking about. I'm not sure if they're aware of the scope of the issue, though. Plus, they're trying to push Intrepid, so I'm sure Hardy is on the back burner.
I'd really like to know they're take on this.

Good idea on the info: I can go first, I guess :)

Toshiba Satellite P205D-S8804
Ubuntu Hardy 8.04 /gfxboot installed instead of grub
Breakdown: .24-21 kernel broke wifi. Originally had dependency issues, which were fixed when I reinstalled grub and reinstalled the updates.
Breakdown, 2: .24-21 kernel "security" update broke display. white screen with regular mouse pointer.


Now, what format should we use, and what path to the developers?

Do you think they'll respond to us?

[puttingau]

I have:
AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 3600+
nVidia MCP61 High Definition Audio
nVidia GeForce 6100 nForce 430 display

I did the 2.6.24-21 (recommended) upgrade a couple of weeks ago, and had a little trouble with nVidia drivers, virtualbox, and menu.lst, but sorted that out.
Then the next (important) update (same, 2.6.24-21) appeared yesterday, and I was a bit scared to try it, but it went on with no problems, nothing to do.
(No noticeable improvements either).

[steveneddy]

My update to the -21 kernel tonight finally worked this time.

[bandyo]

I have:
Acer Extensa 4420 laptop
AMD Athlon 64
ATI Mobility Radeon X1250
Broadcom Wifi 802.11 b/g
the recommended 2.6.24-21 broke both the restricted drivers. Initially I rebooted and logged on to a white screen. Rolled back and disabled restricted graphics driver.
After that I could not enable either of the two restrited drivers (graphics and wifi) in 2.6.24-21. I have not tried the Important update on this mox yet.

[alexcckll]

"Malleus - do you want to talk to the techs and get back in touch with the users.. or shall we get people attaching a standard set of files to here.. and somehow get comms going to the devs?

Not so much how to fix the issue - but make/model/type of machine, Ubuntu version, and a possible breakdown?

Thoughts?"

hmm.

I think the developers are aware of the issues we're talking about. I'm not sure if they're aware of the scope of the issue, though. Plus, they're trying to push Intrepid, so I'm sure Hardy is on the back burner.
I'd really like to know they're take on this.


Which isn't really good enough, considering that Hardy is the Long-term release. I know that Intrepid is probably sexier, as it's doing new stuff...

BUT.... if you're releasing a Long-Term version... this is your most important area...

Or at least I'd hope that was the case..

[alexcckll]

I'm running a Lenovo Thinkpad R61i, Intel graphics, Broadcom wired Ethernet, Intel 49 something something wifi. Intel Centrino Core Duo...

HAve left the -21 updates WELL alone.. still running -19.

[alexcckll]

I'm trying not to. Which is why I'm livid; I, like you, am applying what i would do in work to this.. and I was *horrified* by the "-proposed is connected to production" comments..

IT'S A DEVELOPMENT DOMAIN! SANDBOXED OFF FROM PRODUCTION - OR IT BLOODY WELL SHOULD BE!

Hence - I'm keeping an eye just like i do with Enhancement Requests and Change Requests I raise off problem tickets I receive...

Actually - it feels as though I could be wearing a Plantronics headset right now... arguing with Project Support Officers and dev managers...

IF ONLY the mindset would be MORE like you and I know at work...

Actually, thinking back to the way we do package management at work.. a better practice would be...

Platform Dev (kernel, X, other critical parts of the system. BAckports feeds in here.)

App Dev (packaging up and testing apps)

PRE-PRODUCTION - Simulated production env with App and Plat merged with a snapshot of Production... HEAVY testing done here... Once it passes muster, from a system testing perspective, moves into.. CODE-FREEZE then..

Pre-release - UAT/RC/Call it what you like. Apps tested till they break.. but more from a regular-use perspective. The moment something breaks, it get sslung back to Appdev or Platdev. ONLY when all tests are passed and it's bulletproof, does it get promoted to

PRODUCTION - (-release or -security) - what end-users see. A regular user (Windows expatriate/tyro/someone who relies on their box being stable) should be able to accept these updates without it breaking their kit at all.

Thinking along the probem-management thing... while Launchpad may well be a good tool *for developers*, their Question mechanism isn't really designed with the end-user in mind.

In ITIL terms, an end-user would log an Incident (if it don't work the way it's expected to work, it's an Incident), and needs a way of being able to see his/her incidents. Those Incidents are then assessed, and if enough occur, they're compiled to become a Problem. That problem can then spawn bug reports etc... but the user can still come back under their initial incident ref to see what is happening.

If, however, a user is asking for advice... the Incident is classed as a Query, resolved and closed off (OK - so I'm thinking in terms of a corporate tech support dept - but that's the part of the industry I'm in)

Here's one example of an ITIL best practice guide - http://www.avicode.com/solutionsITILBestPractices.htm

While it's understandable from a development perspective, it is counter-intuitive for an end-user to log a bug - as that assumes more knowledge. It even threw me that a Bug log was how to ask for an enhancement request. But what do I know? I'm tech support!

Take the Atheros or NVidia card issue - or where custom drivers need to be picked up. Surely this would be better done through a package somewhat similar to the original Adobe Flash pacage - that went off to the Adobe website on the user's behalf and pulled the packages back.

In effect, an end-user nowadays won't know as much about the internal workings... they'll think in terms of major.minor release numbers.. won't have a clue as to where in the OS the problem is actually occurring.

I admit this is probably followed by Canonical in terms of commercial customers.. but views such as "My open incidents" would help the end-user..

At work - we use a Service Desk call-tracking app to capture everything... it's only when the Incident (at work, we reversed the terms Problem and Incident) goes to a Release team does it become an Enhancement Request (our term for "bug"). Project people or developers etc raise Enhancement Requests on Release Management. Users raise call tickets/Incidents, even if they are asking for a new app to be AppAdded (Launchpad equiv - "New App" Bug).

I know Canonical were trying to build a knowledgebase AND question-tracking tool.. but it's actually quite difficult to find your own calls once they are logged.

Typically, the flow would go... user reports incident.. if loads of these incident calls are identifed, one is declared as a master call - the others are linked to it (not the same as Duplicate Bugs), these incident calls are tracked through, then if the solution needs to be packaged up, incident ticket goes to Release, who then raise the Enhancement Request.. and close the incident as No Fix/Future Dev/Release, and the Enhancement Number quoted in the call, and the Enhancement log also contains the Incident refnum...

In Launchpad terms.. this could be

Incident - tracked - if one-shot then Knowledgebase piece written... BUT if asking for something new (eg new prospective Linux user asking about kit not supported yet, then raise an enhancement request asking for said product to be worked on... call closed.

"Help, I accepted updates, and now I can't boot". Incident tracked, some info garnered from date/time and previous version... the INCIDENT is sent to Triage...

Basically, the support model might need to change from developers discussing issues to End-User Support. The assumption has to now be that the average user is NOT a programmer.

[Mark224]

Somewhere along all this something is still messed up. I cannot enable the restricted graphic driver (ATI) now with the old kernel. When I try this, it seems to work and I get a restart required box. But it remains disabled after restart.

I always had this. I didn't know it was a problem since it the display did work (but checkbox was never checked after reboot).

BTW my system is as follows:
ABIT NForce2 with Athlon XP 2000+
1G RAM
ATI 9600XT
2 * 80 GB IDE HDD
Linksys WUSB54G-UK v2.1 wireless
Ubuntu 8.04 LTS (Hardy Heron)

Looking at other posts it seems most? people had problems when they have compiled drivers into the kernel. I don't think I have done this. I tried to install the ATI restricted driver (couldn't get the recommended one to download) and I did install the ndiswrapper which did work.

It's a bit of a baptism of fire since I first installed Ubuntu only two weeks ago!

[malleus74]

"DKMS (by Dell) is included in Ubuntu 8.10, allowing kernel drivers to be automatically rebuilt when new kernels are released. This makes it possible for kernel package updates to be made available immediately without waiting for rebuilds of driver packages, and without third-party driver packages becoming out of date when installing these kernel updates. "
I think this is why they're not seeming to worry about kernel issues.


alexcckll: I agree something needs to change. I'd personally be satisfied by the following two changes...

1. software isn't 'recommended' or 'critical security update' unless it's tested (by your method or whatever else would prevent these issues)

2. If software is needed for a security reason, or whatever, that has problems, maybe they could avoid this issue totally by just not allowing it to work with problematic drivers.

If I was about to install an update, and it said "to install these updates, madwifi must be removed", there's no way I'd have installed it!

[icedfusion]

I have recently accepted the upgrade to the latest kernel


Linux version 2.6.24-21-generic (buildd@crested) (gcc version 4.2.3 (Ubuntu 4.2.3-2ubuntu7)) #1 SMP Tue Oct 21 23:09:30 UTC 2008 (Ubuntu 2.6.24-21.43-generic)


However, it always fails with some odd ata1 sector errors.
boot log does not appear to work, so how so i log the booting errors to post?

I checked my /boot/grub/menu.lst and the partition points seem fine.
To rectify my booting problem I revert back to .19.

Any help or ideas?

Thanks

ice.

[alexcckll]

"DKMS (by Dell) is included in Ubuntu 8.10, allowing kernel drivers to be automatically rebuilt when new kernels are released. This makes it possible for kernel package updates to be made available immediately without waiting for rebuilds of driver packages, and without third-party driver packages becoming out of date when installing these kernel updates. "
I think this is why they're not seeming to worry about kernel issues.


alexcckll: I agree something needs to change. I'd personally be satisfied by the following two changes...

1. software isn't 'recommended' or 'critical security update' unless it's tested (by your method or whatever else would prevent these issues)

2. If software is needed for a security reason, or whatever, that has problems, maybe they could avoid this issue totally by just not allowing it to work with problematic drivers.

If I was about to install an update, and it said "to install these updates, madwifi must be removed", there's no way I'd have installed it!
Also - yeah - this is in Intrepid... but what about us on a bloody long-term release?
Will Hardy get it (maybe in 8.04.3)?

Surely the long-term release is worked on FIRST! Or is it only security updates?

[malleus74]

I wish I knew. You'd think so, but human nature...

We need to pinpoint the developer(s) involved, and start pointing this thread's info to them. So...

Who are the kernel developers? Who are the module developers for atheros and nvidia? Which ones do we start sending this info to, or all the above?

[malleus74]

Launchpad isn't the most user-friendly place, is it?

[saffagirl]

Hi guys,

just wanted to add to this thread. I had the same problem with the latest kernel when I installed , had to run depmod- and I'm a bit of a noob so was a little daunting. My nvidia graphics card was not automatically picked up either and had to reselect the restricted driver for the screen not to look funky.

Running vostro 1310- I agree though if there isn't a bug made, then this should be made into one. Incidentally I'm finding .19 more stable- .21 has unmapped some media buttons and I'm not able to play cd/dvd videos properly.

[alexcckll]

Hi guys,

just wanted to add to this thread. I had the same problem with the latest kernel when I installed , had to run depmod- and I'm a bit of a noob so was a little daunting. My nvidia graphics card was not automatically picked up either and had to reselect the restricted driver for the screen not to look funky.

Running vostro 1310- I agree though if there isn't a bug made, then this should be made into one. Incidentally I'm finding .19 more stable- .21 has unmapped some media buttons and I'm not able to play cd/dvd videos properly.

Thanks for that. I suppose two actions are needed.

A master bug raised for all the issues people are having with the -21 revision as a whole.. possibly collate the makes, models, kit makeup from lspci etc (specific components), types of kit (if laptops, users don't have the choice of cards etc) when raising the problem record.

Brainstorm docs suggesting -meta packages to control upgrades for specific laptop and tightly-integrated kit... specific sequencing and post=install actions would be needed - why the hell these aren't scripted, i don't know...

Could people vote up my Brainstorm for proper model-office testing?

[saffagirl]

Thanks for that. I suppose two actions are needed.

A master bug raised for all the issues people are having with the -21 revision as a whole.. possibly collate the makes, models, kit makeup from lspci etc (specific components), types of kit (if laptops, users don't have the choice of cards etc) when raising the problem record.

Brainstorm docs suggesting -meta packages to control upgrades for specific laptop and tightly-integrated kit... specific sequencing and post=install actions would be needed - why the hell these aren't scripted, i don't know...

Could people vote up my Brainstorm for proper model-office testing?


I've had a few issues I've raised a bug for my dvd which isn't playing properly and eject button not working.

You're right something's funky with the master package and needs to be reported. I haven't seen anything in launchpad there. I'm not sure how much priority is gonna be given because of Intrepid....I tested the beta and my wifi was more of a mission again, so leaving until I know it's fixed.

I'll have a look at your brainstorm although I'm trying to understand here you're saying try and make specific package installers for dif models of machine ? Sorry, i'm enjoying this but I'm new so bear with me :)

[saffagirl]

Just read up your idea it sounds good.

A theory I have- if you look at all of us on this thread, I'm seeing two things common nvidia and wl restricted drivers; maybe it has to do with the drivers or maybe it's got something to do with the chipset. We all look like we're running similar configs with laptops? What do you think?

[Mark224]

... and ATI restricted drivers ... and we're not all using laptops

[saffagirl]

... and ATI restricted drivers ... and we're not all using laptops


Sorry I got it wrong-seemed like my theory's got a massive flaw! O well was just trying to find some sort of reason.

[malleus74]

The entire point is this update should not have been pushed as 'recommended', nor the next as 'critical security'. This update was known to have problems with graphics and wifi, and as you can see on this post, quite a few various other issues.

[saffagirl]

The entire point is this update should not have been pushed as 'recommended', nor the next as 'critical security'. This update was known to have problems with graphics and wifi, and as you can see on this post, quite a few various other issues.

I'm in agreement I've only been running ubuntu for a short period and granted I have a had a lot of teething problems, I , like you, expected a stable kernel release...not one that just seems not to work properly. Til then I have grub and 2.6.24.19 and will cont . using it. Clearly like you said we're all having graphics/ wifi issues (that's without any other problems- the one good thing is I've had less lockups.)

[alexcckll]

And now we have the hassle of trying to collate everything and getting a developer to see it our way.

I've also noticed quite a few brainstorm docs where people have been screaming for better hardware support and more stability..

[malleus74]

I am not very familar with launchpad. Does anyone know the site enough to locate who exactly we need to be dealing with?

If so, can we contact them directly and bypass this mess? If so, then maybe we can start contacting the people who posted here who haven't posted their specs.

[alexcckll]

Launchpad isn't the most user-friendly place, is it?
Not from what I noticed...

It's also the case that the average user DOES NOT GIVE A STUFF about a bug being fixed upstream. All they'll be concerned about is "is <incident> going to be fixed, and when?"

We need -meta packages for laptops though - that could link in with Ubuntu Laptop testing...

There's all these teams doing stuff.. but nothing brought together...

[ohiomoto]

I don't believe this is just a -21 issue. I think it runs deeper. I had some of these exact same issues with my -18 upgrade. I ended up doing a fresh install (-16 I believe) and have not had any problems with any upgrades since.

I think the problem is with something that we may have added along the way that doesn't get along with the newer kernels. My hunch is that it might have something to do with the headers changing how things are compiled in the new system. It might be a Java package, an IDE or some utility, who knows. I am no expert and this is purely speculation.

Below is a link with the BS I went through trying to figure out what caused my problems. I do not recommend anyone doing what I did, but I think might be a clue in there. We just need the right person to find it. ;)

Anyway, my point is that this isn't the first time that this sort of thing has happened. It's not purely a -21 issue.

The thread is pretty long. I really sank my teeth into it with the hope that someone would be able to make sense of what was happening.

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=818241

[malleus74]

Info from the other post:

So try this before you go through all of the adding/removing packages:
1. Clean out the package cache and history in Synaptic by going to "Synaptic->Settings->Preferences->Files". Hopefully this will make sure you avoid any issues.

2. Go down the list and mark the following packages for installation or re-installation:
Code:
linux-image-2.6.22-18-generic
linux-headers-2.6.22-18-generic
liux-restricted-modules-2.6.22-18-generic
linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.22-18-generic

Can someone try this and see how it works? I've played around with my hardy disto so much trying to fix this I'm about to start over.

If this doesn't work, the other posts suggest removing the kernel headers.

the last post lists this:

As per Update Manager:

linux-image-2.4.24-19-generic
linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.24-19-generic
linux-headers-2.6.24-19
linux-headers-2.6.24-19-generic
linux-headers-generic
linux-image-generic
linux-libc-dev
linux-restricted-modules-common
linux-restricted-modules-2.6.24-19-generic
linux-restricted-modules-generic

So, any problems may be related to the order of download / installation, rather than the kernel itself.


If any of this works, and/or removing and recompiling the kernel modules under the new kernel... then we need to merge these threads and the others I've found connected to it...

Maybe if this thread is 1500000000 posts long, we can get an answer... :)

Also, I still think they're really not too concerned because of the 'new' way kernels are being handled in Intrepid. Maybe that is their fix... of course that won't help 8.04lts... any ideas or suggestions?


Edit: maybe we should also start digging for other prior kernel issues that might be the exact same problem...?

[alexcckll]

Info from the other post:

So try this before you go through all of the adding/removing packages:
1. Clean out the package cache and history in Synaptic by going to "Synaptic->Settings->Preferences->Files". Hopefully this will make sure you avoid any issues.

2. Go down the list and mark the following packages for installation or re-installation:
Code:
linux-image-2.6.22-18-generic
linux-headers-2.6.22-18-generic
liux-restricted-modules-2.6.22-18-generic
linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.22-18-generic

Can someone try this and see how it works? I've played around with my hardy disto so much trying to fix this I'm about to start over.

If this doesn't work, the other posts suggest removing the kernel headers.

the last post lists this:

As per Update Manager:

linux-image-2.4.24-19-generic
linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.24-19-generic
linux-headers-2.6.24-19
linux-headers-2.6.24-19-generic
linux-headers-generic
linux-image-generic
linux-libc-dev
linux-restricted-modules-common
linux-restricted-modules-2.6.24-19-generic
linux-restricted-modules-generic

So, any problems may be related to the order of download / installation, rather than the kernel itself.


If any of this works, and/or removing and recompiling the kernel modules under the new kernel... then we need to merge these threads and the others I've found connected to it...

Maybe if this thread is 1500000000 posts long, we can get an answer... :)

Also, I still think they're really not too concerned because of the 'new' way kernels are being handled in Intrepid. Maybe that is their fix... of course that won't help 8.04lts... any ideas or suggestions?


Edit: maybe we should also start digging for other prior kernel issues that might be the exact same problem...?
Oh - that REALLY fills me with confidence! :eek:

"Oh - don't worry about this known issue that can fry systems, we have version 0.1 of a completely new substrate that wil fix it". *head hits desk*

"Oh - don't worry that you can't use your old backup tapes on new kit during disrec - we have a new way of seeing disks"

HOW THE HELL are we supposed to give people an OS they can *trust* if the kernel devs screw us around like this?

Linux is TOO BIG for this diva-like attitude now... people RELY on it!

[alexcckll]

Malleus - if you're on - could you join me in #ubuntuforums on irc.freenode.net?

Got developers there..

[flash19]

Coming from here (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=6054145#post6054145)

Ok, I upgraded a while ago to the latest kernel (2.6.24-21) And my computer won't boot into it. It just hangs on the boot screen. If I Use recovery mode I get:
==============
Bug: soft lockup-CPU#0 Stuck for 11s! [Modprobe:1466]

Pid: 1466, Comm: Modprobe Tainted :G D (2.6.24-21 generic #1)
Eip: 0060: [<co31c3f7>] Eflags:00000286 CPU:0
Eip is at _Spin_lock + 0x7/0x10


Then there is a bunch more junk that I didn't feel like copying


I am using the -19 kernel right now, and wonder if I could just skip 21 and get 8.10? Is that possible? Otherwise tell me how to uninstall 21 and I'll see what I can do from there.


There is only one Cpu core showing in the "task manager" where it used to have 2 athough it only used one at a time.


Computer Specs:
Acer Veriton M410

OS: XPP/Ubuntu
Release 8.04
Kernal Linux 2.6.24-19-gerneric
GNOME 2.22.3

Hardware
Memory: 2.0 GiB
Processor: AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual core processor 4200+

Available disk space: 60.8 GiB


========lspci log===============
<Computer name>:~$ lspci
00:00.0 Host bridge: ATI Technologies Inc RS690 Host Bridge
00:02.0 PCI bridge: ATI Technologies Inc RS690 PCI to PCI Bridge (PCI Express Graphics Port 0)
00:07.0 PCI bridge: ATI Technologies Inc RS690 PCI to PCI Bridge (PCI Express Port 3)
00:12.0 SATA controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 Non-Raid-5 SATA
00:13.0 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 USB (OHCI0)
00:13.1 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 USB (OHCI1)
00:13.2 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 USB (OHCI2)
00:13.3 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 USB (OHCI3)
00:13.4 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 USB (OHCI4)
00:13.5 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 USB Controller (EHCI)
00:14.0 SMBus: ATI Technologies Inc SBx00 SMBus Controller (rev 14)
00:14.1 IDE interface: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 IDE
00:14.2 Audio device: ATI Technologies Inc SBx00 Azalia
00:14.3 ISA bridge: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 PCI to LPC Bridge
00:14.4 PCI bridge: ATI Technologies Inc SBx00 PCI to PCI Bridge
00:18.0 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] K8 [Athlon64/Opteron] HyperTransport Technology Configuration
00:18.1 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] K8 [Athlon64/Opteron] Address Map
00:18.2 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] K8 [Athlon64/Opteron] DRAM Controller
00:18.3 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] K8 [Athlon64/Opteron] Miscellaneous Control
01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: ATI Technologies Inc RV516 [Radeon X1300/X1550 Series]
01:00.1 Display controller: ATI Technologies Inc RV516 [Radeon X1300/X1550 Series] (Secondary)
02:00.0 Ethernet controller: Marvell Technology Group Ltd. 88E8056 PCI-E Gigabit Ethernet Controller (rev 20)
03:00.0 Ethernet controller: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. RTL-8169 Gigabit Ethernet (rev 10)
03:01.0 Ethernet controller: Atheros Communications Inc. AR2413 802.11bg NIC (rev 01)
===================


========lspci -wx Log=====
<computer name>:~$ lspci -vvx
00:00.0 Host bridge: ATI Technologies Inc RS690 Host Bridge
Subsystem: Foxconn International, Inc. Unknown device 0e0a
Control: I/O- Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B-
Status: Cap- 66MHz+ UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=medium >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort+ >SERR- <PERR-
Latency: 64
00: 02 10 10 79 06 00 20 22 00 00 00 06 00 40 00 00
10: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
20: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 5b 10 0a 0e
30: 00 00 00 00 c4 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00

00:02.0 PCI bridge: ATI Technologies Inc RS690 PCI to PCI Bridge (PCI Express Graphics Port 0) (prog-if 00 [Normal decode])
Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B-
Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR-
Latency: 0, Cache Line Size: 4 bytes
Bus: primary=00, secondary=01, subordinate=01, sec-latency=0
I/O behind bridge: 0000d000-0000dfff
Memory behind bridge: fde00000-fdefffff
Prefetchable memory behind bridge: 00000000d0000000-00000000dfffffff
Secondary status: 66MHz- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort+ <SERR- <PERR-
BridgeCtl: Parity- SERR- NoISA- VGA+ MAbort- >Reset- FastB2B-
Capabilities: <access denied>
00: 02 10 13 79 07 04 10 00 00 00 04 06 01 00 01 00
10: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 01 01 00 d1 d1 00 20
20: e0 fd e0 fd 01 d0 f1 df 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
30: 00 00 00 00 50 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ff 00 08 00

00:07.0 PCI bridge: ATI Technologies Inc RS690 PCI to PCI Bridge (PCI Express Port 3) (prog-if 00 [Normal decode])
Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B-
Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR-
Latency: 0, Cache Line Size: 4 bytes
Bus: primary=00, secondary=02, subordinate=02, sec-latency=0
I/O behind bridge: 0000e000-0000efff
Memory behind bridge: fdd00000-fddfffff
Prefetchable memory behind bridge: 00000000fdf00000-00000000fdffffff
Secondary status: 66MHz- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- <SERR- <PERR-
BridgeCtl: Parity- SERR- NoISA- VGA- MAbort- >Reset- FastB2B-
Capabilities: <access denied>
00: 02 10 17 79 07 04 10 00 00 00 04 06 01 00 01 00
10: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 02 02 00 e1 e1 00 00
20: d0 fd d0 fd f1 fd f1 fd 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
30: 00 00 00 00 50 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ff 00 00 00

00:12.0 SATA controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 Non-Raid-5 SATA (prog-if 01 [AHCI 1.0])
Subsystem: Foxconn International, Inc. Unknown device 0e0a
Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B-
Status: Cap+ 66MHz+ UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=medium >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR-
Latency: 64
Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 16
Region 0: I/O ports at ff00 [size=8]
Region 1: I/O ports at fe00 [size=4]
Region 2: I/O ports at fd00 [size=8]
Region 3: I/O ports at fc00 [size=4]
Region 4: I/O ports at fb00 [size=16]
Region 5: Memory at fe02f000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=1K]
Capabilities: <access denied>
00: 02 10 80 43 07 00 30 02 00 01 06 01 00 40 00 00
10: 01 ff 00 00 01 fe 00 00 01 fd 00 00 01 fc 00 00
20: 01 fb 00 00 00 f0 02 fe 00 00 00 00 5b 10 0a 0e
30: 00 00 00 00 60 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0b 01 00 00

00:13.0 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 USB (OHCI0) (prog-if 10 [OHCI])
Subsystem: Foxconn International, Inc. Unknown device 0e0a
Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B-
Status: Cap- 66MHz+ UDF- FastB2B+ ParErr- DEVSEL=medium >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR-
Latency: 64, Cache Line Size: 4 bytes
Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 17
Region 0: Memory at fe02e000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=4K]
00: 02 10 87 43 07 00 a0 02 00 10 03 0c 01 40 80 00
10: 00 e0 02 fe 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
20: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 5b 10 0a 0e
30: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 05 01 00 00

00:13.1 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 USB (OHCI1) (prog-if 10 [OHCI])
Subsystem: Foxconn International, Inc. Unknown device 0e0a
Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B-
Status: Cap- 66MHz+ UDF- FastB2B+ ParErr- DEVSEL=medium >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR-
Latency: 64, Cache Line Size: 4 bytes
Interrupt: pin B routed to IRQ 18
Region 0: Memory at fe02d000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=4K]
00: 02 10 88 43 07 00 a0 02 00 10 03 0c 01 40 00 00
10: 00 d0 02 fe 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
20: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 5b 10 0a 0e
30: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0b 02 00 00

00:13.2 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 USB (OHCI2) (prog-if 10 [OHCI])
Subsystem: Foxconn International, Inc. Unknown device 0e0a
Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B-
Status: Cap- 66MHz+ UDF- FastB2B+ ParErr- DEVSEL=medium >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR-
Latency: 64, Cache Line Size: 4 bytes
Interrupt: pin C routed to IRQ 19
Region 0: Memory at fe02c000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=4K]
00: 02 10 89 43 07 00 a0 02 00 10 03 0c 01 40 00 00
10: 00 c0 02 fe 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
20: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 5b 10 0a 0e
30: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0a 03 00 00

00:13.3 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 USB (OHCI3) (prog-if 10 [OHCI])
Subsystem: Foxconn International, Inc. Unknown device 0e0a
Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B-
Status: Cap- 66MHz+ UDF- FastB2B+ ParErr- DEVSEL=medium >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR-
Latency: 64, Cache Line Size: 4 bytes
Interrupt: pin B routed to IRQ 18
Region 0: Memory at fe02b000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=4K]
00: 02 10 8a 43 07 00 a0 02 00 10 03 0c 01 40 00 00
10: 00 b0 02 fe 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
20: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 5b 10 0a 0e
30: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0b 02 00 00

00:13.4 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 USB (OHCI4) (prog-if 10 [OHCI])
Subsystem: Foxconn International, Inc. Unknown device 0e0a
Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B-
Status: Cap- 66MHz+ UDF- FastB2B+ ParErr- DEVSEL=medium >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR-
Latency: 64, Cache Line Size: 4 bytes
Interrupt: pin C routed to IRQ 19
Region 0: Memory at fe02a000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=4K]
00: 02 10 8b 43 07 00 a0 02 00 10 03 0c 01 40 00 00
10: 00 a0 02 fe 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
20: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 5b 10 0a 0e
30: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0a 03 00 00

00:13.5 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 USB Controller (EHCI) (prog-if 20 [EHCI])
Subsystem: Foxconn International, Inc. Unknown device 0e0a
Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV+ VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B-
Status: Cap+ 66MHz+ UDF- FastB2B+ ParErr- DEVSEL=medium >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR-
Latency: 64, Cache Line Size: 64 bytes
Interrupt: pin D routed to IRQ 20
Region 0: Memory at fe029000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=256]
Capabilities: <access denied>
00: 02 10 86 43 17 00 b0 02 00 20 03 0c 10 40 00 00
10: 00 90 02 fe 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
20: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 5b 10 0a 0e
30: 00 00 00 00 c0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0b 04 00 00

00:14.0 SMBus: ATI Technologies Inc SBx00 SMBus Controller (rev 14)
Subsystem: Foxconn International, Inc. Unknown device 0e0a
Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster- SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B-
Status: Cap+ 66MHz+ UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=medium >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR-
Region 0: I/O ports at 0b00 [size=16]
Capabilities: <access denied>
00: 02 10 85 43 03 04 30 02 14 00 05 0c 00 00 80 00
10: 01 0b 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
20: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 5b 10 0a 0e
30: 00 00 00 00 b0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00

00:14.1 IDE interface: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 IDE (prog-if 8a [Master SecP PriP])
Subsystem: Foxconn International, Inc. Unknown device 0e0a
Control: I/O+ Mem- BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B-
Status: Cap- 66MHz+ UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=medium >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR-
Latency: 64
Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 17
Region 0: I/O ports at 01f0 [size=8]
Region 1: I/O ports at 03f4 [size=1]
Region 2: I/O ports at 0170 [size=8]
Region 3: I/O ports at 0374 [size=1]
Region 4: I/O ports at f900 [size=16]
00: 02 10 8c 43 05 00 20 02 00 8a 01 01 00 40 00 00
10: 01 00 00 00 01 00 00 00 01 00 00 00 01 00 00 00
20: 01 f9 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 5b 10 0a 0e
30: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ff 01 00 00

00:14.2 Audio device: ATI Technologies Inc SBx00 Azalia
Subsystem: Foxconn International, Inc. Unknown device 0e0a
Control: I/O- Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B-
Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=slow >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR-
Latency: 64, Cache Line Size: 4 bytes
Interrupt: pin ? routed to IRQ 17
Region 0: Memory at fe024000 (64-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=16K]
Capabilities: <access denied>
00: 02 10 83 43 06 00 10 04 00 00 03 04 01 40 00 00
10: 04 40 02 fe 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
20: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 5b 10 0a 0e
30: 00 00 00 00 50 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 05 00 00 00

00:14.3 ISA bridge: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 PCI to LPC Bridge
Subsystem: Foxconn International, Inc. Unknown device 0e0a
Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle+ MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B-
Status: Cap- 66MHz+ UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=medium >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR-
Latency: 0
00: 02 10 8d 43 0f 00 20 02 00 00 01 06 00 00 80 00
10: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
20: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 5b 10 0a 0e
30: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00

00:14.4 PCI bridge: ATI Technologies Inc SBx00 PCI to PCI Bridge (prog-if 01 [Subtractive decode])
Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop+ ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B-
Status: Cap- 66MHz+ UDF- FastB2B+ ParErr- DEVSEL=medium >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR-
Latency: 64
Bus: primary=00, secondary=03, subordinate=03, sec-latency=64
I/O behind bridge: 0000c000-0000cfff
Memory behind bridge: fdc00000-fdcfffff
Prefetchable memory behind bridge: fdb00000-fdbfffff
Secondary status: 66MHz- FastB2B+ ParErr- DEVSEL=medium >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort+ <SERR- <PERR-
BridgeCtl: Parity- SERR- NoISA- VGA- MAbort- >Reset- FastB2B-
00: 02 10 84 43 27 00 a0 02 00 01 04 06 00 40 81 00
10: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 03 03 40 c0 c0 80 22
20: c0 fd c0 fd b0 fd b0 fd 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
30: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00

00:18.0 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] K8 [Athlon64/Opteron] HyperTransport Technology Configuration
Control: I/O- Mem- BusMaster- SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B-
Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR-
Capabilities: <access denied>
00: 22 10 00 11 00 00 10 00 00 00 00 06 00 00 80 00
10: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
20: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
30: 00 00 00 00 80 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00

00:18.1 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] K8 [Athlon64/Opteron] Address Map
Control: I/O- Mem- BusMaster- SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B-
Status: Cap- 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR-
00: 22 10 01 11 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 06 00 00 80 00
10: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
20: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
30: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00

00:18.2 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] K8 [Athlon64/Opteron] DRAM Controller
Control: I/O- Mem- BusMaster- SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B-
Status: Cap- 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR-
00: 22 10 02 11 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 06 00 00 80 00
10: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
20: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
30: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00

00:18.3 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] K8 [Athlon64/Opteron] Miscellaneous Control
Control: I/O- Mem- BusMaster- SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B-
Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR-
Capabilities: <access denied>
00: 22 10 03 11 00 00 10 00 00 00 00 06 00 00 80 00
10: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
20: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
30: 00 00 00 00 f0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00

01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: ATI Technologies Inc RV516 [Radeon X1300/X1550 Series] (prog-if 00 [VGA controller])
Subsystem: Diamond Multimedia Systems Unknown device 3000
Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B-
Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR-
Latency: 0, Cache Line Size: 4 bytes
Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 19
Region 0: Memory at d0000000 (64-bit, prefetchable) [size=256M]
Region 2: Memory at fdef0000 (64-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=64K]
Region 4: I/O ports at de00 [size=256]
[virtual] Expansion ROM at fde00000 [disabled] [size=128K]
Capabilities: <access denied>
00: 02 10 87 71 07 00 10 00 00 00 00 03 01 00 80 00
10: 0c 00 00 d0 00 00 00 00 04 00 ef fd 00 00 00 00
20: 01 de 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 92 10 00 30
30: 00 00 00 00 50 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0a 01 00 00

01:00.1 Display controller: ATI Technologies Inc RV516 [Radeon X1300/X1550 Series] (Secondary)
Subsystem: Diamond Multimedia Systems Unknown device 3001
Control: I/O- Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B-
Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR-
Latency: 0, Cache Line Size: 4 bytes
Region 0: Memory at fdee0000 (64-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=64K]
Capabilities: <access denied>
00: 02 10 a7 71 06 00 10 00 00 00 80 03 01 00 00 00
10: 04 00 ee fd 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
20: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 92 10 01 30
30: 00 00 00 00 50 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ff 00 00 00

02:00.0 Ethernet controller: Marvell Technology Group Ltd. 88E8056 PCI-E Gigabit Ethernet Controller (rev 20)
Subsystem: Foxconn International, Inc. Unknown device 0e0a
Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B-
Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR-
Latency: 0, Cache Line Size: 4 bytes
Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 221
Region 0: Memory at fddfc000 (64-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=16K]
Region 2: I/O ports at ee00 [size=256]
[virtual] Expansion ROM at fdf00000 [disabled] [size=128K]
Capabilities: <access denied>
00: ab 11 64 43 07 04 10 00 20 00 00 02 01 00 00 00
10: 04 c0 df fd 00 00 00 00 01 ee 00 00 00 00 00 00
20: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 5b 10 0a 0e
30: 00 00 00 00 48 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0b 01 00 00

03:00.0 Ethernet controller: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. RTL-8169 Gigabit Ethernet (rev 10)
Subsystem: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. RTL-8169 Gigabit Ethernet
Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV+ VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B-
Status: Cap+ 66MHz+ UDF- FastB2B+ ParErr- DEVSEL=medium >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR-
Latency: 64 (8000ns min, 16000ns max), Cache Line Size: 32 bytes
Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 21
Region 0: I/O ports at ce00 [size=256]
Region 1: Memory at fdcff000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=256]
[virtual] Expansion ROM at fdb00000 [disabled] [size=128K]
Capabilities: <access denied>
00: ec 10 69 81 17 00 b0 02 10 00 00 02 08 40 00 00
10: 01 ce 00 00 00 f0 cf fd 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
20: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ec 10 69 81
30: 00 00 00 00 dc 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 05 01 20 40

03:01.0 Ethernet controller: Atheros Communications Inc. AR2413 802.11bg NIC (rev 01)
Subsystem: D-Link System Inc Unknown device 3a1d
Control: I/O- Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B-
Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B+ ParErr- DEVSEL=medium >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR-
Latency: 168 (2500ns min, 7000ns max), Cache Line Size: 4 bytes
Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 22
Region 0: Memory at fdce0000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=64K]
Capabilities: <access denied>
00: 8c 16 1a 00 06 00 90 02 01 00 00 02 01 a8 00 00
10: 00 00 ce fd 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
20: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 01 50 00 00 86 11 1d 3a
30: 00 00 00 00 44 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0a 01 0a 1c

[alexcckll]

I was in conversation in the Ubuntuforums chat channel.. it turns out that the devs seem to think that bendors should run their own repos if they "do stupid things"...

"(23:20:27) alcockell: .. and I took my vendor's advice to stay well away from -21 for the time being...
(23:20:30) FTMichael: alcockell, be sure to bookmark http://ubuntuforums.org/ if you haven't already, and check there if you have any issues.
(23:20:33) jdong: alcockell: we devs love to be telepathic about hardware configurations but unfortunately it's not possible
(23:20:36) alcockell: I have done...
(23:20:52) ***FTMichael has found installing Ubuntu himself to be completely painless
(23:21:05) jdong: luck of the draw with hardware
(23:21:08) alcockell: Yeah - I take it you've seen that mammoth thread... Malleus74 and I had been wondering hjow to get in touch with devs...
(23:21:16) alcockell: Umm - but surely it shouldn't be?
(23:21:30) jdong: alcockell: why shouldn't it be? we are blindly targeting unknown hardware
(23:21:32) alcockell: Especially as this is the "Linux for the rest of us"?
(23:21:39) jdong: alcockell: the only problems we know about are those people report to us
(23:21:42) EDavidBurg: jdong: you're an Ubuntu dev?
(23:21:44) jdong: we have ZERO cooperation from hardware makers
(23:21:46) jdong: EDavidBurg: yes"

"(23:22:09) jdong: alcockell: testing is a sampling of hardware configs
(23:22:14) jdong: it cannot be exhaustive
(23:22:21) alcockell: Umm - forgive me.. but -roposed and then straight into the wils?
(23:22:23) PrivateVoid: jdong, and there are times it is painful to assist Ubuntu, but it is worth it in the end
(23:22:25) alcockell: *wild?"

Went on to talk about the bug being in the update-grub script...

I can supply the full logs if people want them..

[alexcckll]

There is still this "I'm responsible for this little bit over here" viewpoint.. rather than across-the-board QA...

[Mark224]

FWIW If Ubuntu is going to hit the big time it has got to be easier to maintain. If a large number of people have to spend hours every day wading through 1000's of posts in these forums to fix problems introduced by a recommended update to their system they're going to go back to Windows or find another distro.

I certainly am considering giving up with Ubuntu. I picked Ubuntu because it had the reputation for being the easiest distro to use. I have not found it to be easy at all and I am a technical person, having used Solaris and AIX at work for many years.

Going back to the previous kernel (19) I can log in now but I can't get wireless networking to work, despite having spent many more hours reading more threads on the subject. In fact there are so many threads about broken wireless networking I would be lucky if anyone even read mine.

Sorry for the grumpy post but I am tearing my hair out over this!

[malleus74]

Alex: Sorry for not signing on last night with you. I was running the live cd to function, and it wouldn't let me really utilize my connection very well. It allowed me to sign onto the forums but I couldn't even post. I didn't even want to attempt IRC.

I'm really not surprised by the developers' thoughts on the matter. Disappointed, but not surprised.

Jdong, other developers, please listen to this, and post something with us instead of lurking.

We're trying to help you help us. I'm pretty sure most of us are aware you don't get a lot of help from the hardware vendors.

The change we're asking for is not to recommend upgrades, especially kernel upgrades, when there are bug reports clearly showing popular hardware not to work with it. Can we let those who want to test it, test it? If there's a problem with this idea, can you explain this to us why it's a problem?

There's a lot of people with nvidia and ati video. There's quite a few now using atheros chips for wifi.

And maybe there's a big bug here we haven't totally diagnosed. If removing kernel headers, etc, fixes some issues....

[Mark224]

Things are going from bad to worse now. Not only have I no networking anymore but virtually nothing works at all. If I log in via the GUI none of the programs from the "Places" or "System" menu start at all. I get the rotating cursor and then nothing. I can't even shut the damn thing down.

If I log in via a terminal then almost all commands hang forever.

I have absolutely no idea what to do about all these problems except wipe everything and reinstall from scratch. This is the kind of problem I expect from Windows and what I had hoped to avoid with Linux.

Therefore I will reinstall everything from scratch and definitely NOT accept any updates for a very long time. :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

[alexcckll]

Alex: Sorry for not signing on last night with you. I was running the live cd to function, and it wouldn't let me really utilize my connection very well. It allowed me to sign onto the forums but I couldn't even post. I didn't even want to attempt IRC.

I'm really not surprised by the developers' thoughts on the matter. Disappointed, but not surprised.

Jdong, other developers, please listen to this, and post something with us instead of lurking.

We're trying to help you help us. I'm pretty sure most of us are aware you don't get a lot of help from the hardware vendors.

The change we're asking for is not to recommend upgrades, especially kernel upgrades, when there are bug reports clearly showing popular hardware not to work with it. Can we let those who want to test it, test it? If there's a problem with this idea, can you explain this to us why it's a problem?

There's a lot of people with nvidia and ati video. There's quite a few now using atheros chips for wifi.

And maybe there's a big bug here we haven't totally diagnosed. If removing kernel headers, etc, fixes some issues....
Oh - to add to Malleus's comment... have you *seen* the buglist with 8.10?

WHY was it released with that many showstoppers?

They really are not helping themselves..

[malleus74]

I'm 'participating' in a thread called "A Little Rant on "User-Friendly":

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=6075700

where this same mindset applies. There are people arguing that the deskop gui dumbs people down, so basically it's more user-friendly to use the terminal.

If I can't get users to understand what I thought was a simple, well-reasoned point,... what hope do I have with developers? Though, there have been developers defending my point, so... :)

Anyway, I started over on my machine with Intrepid. So far everything, including wifi, works out of the box. This site: http://ubuntutip.googlepages.com/home should be really helpful for the easiest changes. Either way, I'm hoping I can get attention to the main issue here. I'm going to document every change that I do and post the information when I get everything "right", or the machine crashes.

It doesn't matter whether I run Feisty, Gutsy, Hardy, Intrepid, or magically get Jaunty from the future. If a change isn't done in how the updates are being done, then Ubuntu itself can't be considered stable. I at least can't trust to ever update my system without imaging first, and massive research and documentation.

So, others who share this plight, post your info on your hardware, ubuntu version and/or changes, and what happened badly with your install. Post what changes you did to fix the problems, or if you just had to use an older kernel.

We'll get it to the developers attention, kudos again to Alex for doing this. We'll push for this change, and bring attention to the solutions. Eventually we should narrow down exactly what happened, and hopefully get a real permanent fix. Massive regression is not acceptable.

[bandyo]

I finally got it working with wireless and ATI video driver. I wanted to check out 8.10 and went to System > Administration > Software Sources. There I discovered that for some unknown reason the "The Proprietary drivers for devises (Restricted)" was unchecked. When I checked it, I found some restricted modules related to 21 was available. I let that go through. After a restart grub showed the 2.6.24-21 choice again. I had uninstalled it before. First thing I noticed was that wifi was working. Then I enabled the restricted ATI video driver. It downloaded and installed one file. After a second restart, I could enable visal effects too.

I will wait a few days before the 8.10 upgrade.

I hope this helps someone.

[alexcckll]

We've got another thread out there...
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=963521

I've asked the OP to join us...

[alexcckll]

Here we go... found these press articles which criticise the development model...

http://www.techworld.com/features/index.cfm?featureID=3443&printerfriendly=1
http://kerneltrap.org/node/5725

These software engineers are starting to mention ITIL in the comments...

[alexcckll]

Oh.. AND... http://np237.livejournal.com/19763.html
A rant on how the kernel has been developed..

[malleus74]

Point made 100% in that last link posted.

I really wonder if the freedom Linux developers have is a plus or minus. Stability and zero regression should be priority... create kernel modules for everything else and then only when all the bugs are worked out, should they should actually change the original code...

Well, that's how it would be done in a production environment. Maybe it's finally time to rethink the large kernel versus microkernel model... you might want to do a search on the flame war Torvalds had over it in the 90's.

Hello developers! Is no one going to actually respond in public to the main argument: Why should there be massive regression with a minor update? Why is this acceptable?

I'm getting real close in contacting Ubuntu directly over this. I really want Ubuntu to succeed, but this environment has to change for all our sakes.

The linux kernel upgrade environment described in the article above is just not acceptable. Maybe Canonical needs to step in here, and branch away from the main kernel development for stability reasons...

[malleus74]

How are all the problems going? Has most people been able to migrate to the .24-21 kernel?

[Mark224]

I haven't dared to "upgrade" again yet. I just haven't got the time or the knowledge to try to sort out the mess.

Anyway I've got some very weird USB problem which is taking up all my spare time. If anyone is interested the thread is here http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=966377.

[malleus74]

If you have the space, etc, you might want to look into this... that way if the upgrade fails you've not lost anything.

http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/partimage

[ohiomoto]

I just upgraded my older Dell Latitude C610 from 7.10 to 8.04LTS just to see what would happen. It went perfectly and I now have the 2.6.24-21 kernel flawlessly on my Vostro 1400 and my C610.

I don't think the kernel is the smoking gun here. I'm not saying there isn't a problem. I know there is. I went through it with my -18 upgrade. It would be nice if someone could explain it so we can understand what is happening.

The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that Microsoft is behind all of this. They are just trying to make Ubuntu look bad! lol

[Mark224]

@malleus74
Thanks. I'll have a look at this.

[malleus74]

I just upgraded my older Dell Latitude C610 from 7.10 to 8.04LTS just to see what would happen. It went perfectly and I now have the 2.6.24-21 kernel flawlessly on my Vostro 1400 and my C610.

I don't think the kernel is the smoking gun here. I'm not saying there isn't a problem. I know there is. I went through it with my -18 upgrade. It would be nice if someone could explain it so we can understand what is happening.

The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that Microsoft is behind all of this. They are just trying to make Ubuntu look bad! lol

LOL! The kernel developers are actually secret Microsoft employees! I knew it! ;)

The problem seems to be that a lot of people who update the kernel have modules installed that are problematic. It's not the kernel itself... it's the way the modules react when it's upgraded. But, there's a lot of people with atheros, nvidia, ati, etc, and I can't state enough that there were already bug reports filed for these very issues. Plus, I just don't understand how regression on a large scale is acceptable.

I do think they're working on a new way with the Intrepid kernel where this problem shouldn't happen. I just don't know when that idea might be backported, if it's even possible.

[Mark224]

Can you post links to these bug reports? These might help find us find workarounds.

[malleus74]

I think I have time tonight, and I'll scroll through all the posts here and get them. :)

[alexcckll]

@malleus74 - You're right. It isn't acceptable at all.

Surely the best way with these workarounds would be to script and package *those*.. as a stopgap.

[alexcckll]

@malleus74 - You're right. It isn't acceptable at all.

Surely the best way with these workarounds would be to script and package *those*.. as a stopgap.

[malleus74]

Just to rehash the problems and possible solutions, bug reports, etc:

>>>>Problem: bootup fails, grub menu.list incorrectly lists the partition.

>>>>Solution:
If the grub menu is hidden, hit esc when rebooting.

Highlight the menu entry -19 (recovery) and then press the e key.
view each line of the list,
check that the line
root (hd0,0)
is correct, such as 0 means boot partition is partition 1.
press b to boot if things look ok

once in the repair menu, select fix x
after repair select normal boot.

>>>>Thanks to godfree2 for this fix.

***************
>>>> Problem: install fails with a dependency error

E: linux-image-2.6.24-21-generic: subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 2
E: linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.24-21-generic: dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
E: linux-image-generic: dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
E: linux-restricted-modules-2.6.24-21-generic: dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
E: linux-restricted-modules-generic: dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
E: linux-generic: dependency problems - leaving unconfigured

>>>> Solution:
If you didn't uninstall the previous kernel, boot into it, and your system should be fine. Then, make sure that grub is installed, and re-run the install.

>>>> Thanks to malleus74 ;) for this fix.

***************
>>>> Problem: StartupManager incorrectly editing grub's menu.list

startupmanager removed the AUTOMAGIC ending line in menu.lst
and it placed menu lines above ## BEGIN AUTOMAGIC ... line. Bad news.
I did this a couple of times and when startupmanager falsely stated a missing ### END DEBIAN AUTOMAGIC
I selected the fix option, startupmanager failed to fix.
startupmanager also forced use of root (hd0,0) despite root being on partition 2.

>>>> Solution:
It'd probably be easier to just edit menu.list with a text editor than bother with StartupManager until the problems are 100% worked out.

>>>> Thanks to godfree2 for this fix.

***************

>>>> Problem: The 3-way merge with the .24-21 kernel install fails.

When I updated to .21 yesterday I tried to do the 3-way merge of the menu.lst, which failed. At the end the Upgrade Manager said configuration was not completed.

>>>> Solution:
Eventually I rebooted to .19 and reinstalled all of the .21 packages, I had the upgrade overwrite my menu.lst and after rebooting everything was great. (note from malleus74: I'd probably just leave the menu.list alone and manually edit it to show the .24-21 kernels, but that's just me ;) )

>>>> Thanks to the_maplebar for this fix.

***************

>>>>Problem: thumb drives don't automount

Thought I'd chime in too, with my Kubuntu upgrade to -21. Basically, I've lost the ability for thumb drives to automount. I've described the problem in more detail here:

http://kubuntuforums.net/forums/inde...opic=3098275.0

>>>>Solution:
open a terminal and run lsusb, the thumb drive will mount. Otherwise, it just sits there with its LED off and no new entries to syslog.
(note from malleus74: I think this qualifies as a hack more than a fix, but it does the trick! )

>>>> Thanks to riff raff for this fix.

********************

FIRST BUG REPORT: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+s...24/+bug/283711

"package linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.24-21-generic 2.6.24-21.32 failed to install/upgrade: dependency problems - leaving unconfigured"

********************

>>>>> Problem: kernel panic when installing madwifi / modprobe athi_pci

I have a similar issue, did the upgrade from 2.6.24-19 to 2.6.24-21 with no problems at first. This laptop has the Atheros 5007 chipset and with every kernal upgrade I have had to install the madwifi driver. (Note from Malleus74: this is the first time the problem was brought up (thanks to rlogan) multiple people have this issue, including me when I was using Hardy.

>>>> Solution: boot with the .24-19 kernel (this is hack, but it works)

>>>>> Thanks to rlogan, malleus74 ;) , alexcckkll ;) , and a million other people posting on this issue.

**********************

SECOND BUG REPORT: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+s...cf/+bug/226708

**********************

THIRD BUG REPORT: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+s...ta/+bug/278823

**********************

>>>> Problem: update with grub fails, can't boot with .24-21

As for recovering from the madwifi update of the 2.6.24-21, I found that if I removed the files starting with wlan located in the folder /lib/modules/2.6.24-21-generic/net. Then reboot using 2.6.24-21 kernel option through grub. I hope this helps some of you out there. Unfortunately wifi still will not work for kernel 2.6.24-21 but at least you will be able to boot into it and if/when there is a solution you will be able to apply it.
(Note from Malleus74: alternate fix for getting the install to work. )

>>>>Solution: posted above

>>>> Thanks to kosmos2121 for this fix.

**********************

>>>>> Problem: lost dual boot

Hi - I dual boot with vista and everything was running smoothly for the last month - but after I upgraded to 2.6.24-21 today - I can get ubuntu to still load but I can't get vista to run, and when I try to boot vista I get sent to a recovery mode (i'm on a lenovo thinkpad). I'm new to the Ubuntu OS and dual booting - any suggestions about how I can get vista to run again? I'm getting the blue screen of death and I'm pretty sure all I did was install 2.6.24 -21. Any suggestions would be appreciated.

>>>> Solution:

http://neosmart.net/blog/2008/window...disc-download/

http://neosmart.net/wiki/display/EBC...sta+Bootloader

http://neosmart.net/wiki/display/EBC...mentation+Home


>>>> Thanks to Zimmer for this fix.

************************

>>>> Problem: Lost video

Lost video on my machine, so i rolled back

>>>> Solution: posted above, just use .24-19 kernel

>>>> Thanks to jbman for this fix.

***********************

FOURTH BUG REPORT: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/284845

***********************
>>>> Problem : wireless kernel panic (see first post above)

Well I was able to get my machine back up. It was the wireless that was causing it to kernel panic. What I did is I disabled the wireless in the bios(just turning off the kill switch won't work) then I was able to successfully boot into the 2.6.24-21-generic kernel. The next step I did was remove "ath_pci" from /etc/modules. Once I did that I stated from scratch with the drivers. I just did theses steps (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=942195) which I wrote. After that I rebooted, I enabled the wireless in the bios and all is well. I can boot into the new kernel. Hope this helps.

>>>>> Solution: posted above

>>>>>Thanks to nxion for this fix.(note from malleus74: wish it worked with all hardware ;) )

********************

FIFTH BUG REPORT: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/hardy/+source/linux/2.6.24-21.42

********************

SIXTH BUG REPORT: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/290130/

SEVENTH BUG REPORT: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/290113

********************
!!!!!PRIMARY PROBLEM!!!!!

For many users the "breakdown" caused by the recent kernel upgrade were anticipated by developers.

If you need to compile drivers into the kernel to achieve hardware compatibility, the new kernel will lose these drivers. This is not a secret.

An admin advised me thus:

Quote:
When using the driver manually from nvidia site and there's an update/patch it will "break" the system. It's because you build the driver for the previous kernel. So you have to build the driver against the new kernel. It's the same way that you install the driver the last time.

Similarly, the Ubuntu community website on Acer laptops https://help.ubuntu.com/community/AspireOne

Quote:
Every time there is a kernel update you will need to perform the following steps to make the wireless work

.
(There follows a sequence of terminal commands.)

Other examples of other drivers can be given.

Currently, the situation is that the developers releasing these kernel updates assume every user has kept note of what drivers he/she had to compile (or 'build' )into the kernel, and has made note of the steps and commands involved to reinstall those drivers.

I think this is putting too much of a load on the user. These updates came marked as recommended, with no warning attached.

For many users this is not a bug, it is a feature of the system. A bug report would be ignored by the developer.

!!!!PRIMARY PROBLEM!!!!

>>>> Thanks to Bloch for this insight!

************************

>>>> Problem: boot up failure

fails with some odd ata1 sector errors.
boot log does not appear to work, so how so i log the booting errors to post?

I checked my /boot/grub/menu.lst and the partition points seem fine.
To rectify my booting problem I revert back to .19.

>>>> Solution: ???????????????

>>>> Thanks to ********* for this fix.

**************************
!!!PREVIOUS ISSUES PERTAINING TO KERNEL UPDATE !!!!

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=818241

(Note from malleus74: this is not the first time, nor probably the last with this problem, ... unless we get the right person / group's attention.

>>>> Thanks to ohiomoto for bringing this to our attention.
**************************

I didn't list every problem, but if it applied to nvidia, ati, etc coming up with a blank screen or crashing, you can boot with the older kernel and remove the restricted drivers. If it's wifi, there's a few fixes listed above, but most people with atheros drivers /madwifi are just out of luck with the new kernel.

My recommendation: everyone who can, list your hardware, what happened wrong, and any possible fixes. At that point, jdong is one of the developers, so I guess you can contact him through ubuntu forums directly ;) , post on launchpad if you can figure the clunky interface out, link any other related posts to this one, etc. PLEASE POST WHATEVER RESPONSE YOU GET HERE! :) We need to know.

Either post here directly or send me a message if you need more help.

Thanks especially to alexcckkll, nxion, godfree2, and all the rest who have followed this thread and given help.

[gerben1]

... I didn't list every problem, but if it applied to nvidia, ati, etc coming up with a blank screen or crashing, you can boot with the older kernel and remove the restricted drivers. ...

I have the problem with the white screen: after the upgrade to 2.6.24-21 I was stuck with a white screen after logging in. I am running kernel 2.6.24-19 for now as that is running fine.

If I just turn off Compiz effects (after booting 2.6.24-19) and then run 2.6.24-21 I do not get the white screen, and I can then see that the problem is that there simply is no restricted driver loaded for the video card i.e. in System-> Hardware drivers there is no check box for the video driver, so there is no way to enable it (and I do not dare to try envy or such for fear of breaking my working video in 2.6.24-19).

It doesn't seem like a good idea to me to remove the restricted driver when running a previous kernel. Obviously the problem goes away when you simply do not use the restricted driver, but we are running the previous kernel because we DO want to use the driver...

[malleus74]

It doesn't seem like a good idea to me to remove the restricted driver when running a previous kernel. Obviously the problem goes away when you simply do not use the restricted driver, but we are running the previous kernel because we DO want to use the driver...

I apologize if I wasn't clear on the post above! I meant if you wanted to use the .24-21 kernel then you could stop using the restricted driver. Of course you don't have to do anything if you stay with .24-19.

The best fix would be the kernel developers to look at this issue, and let us know where we're at.

[flash19]

I solved my problems by going to 8.10 everything is working fine so far! 8-) Thanks for trying to help!

[alexcckll]

I solved my problems by going to 8.10 everything is working fine so far! 8-) Thanks for trying to help!
Oooookaaaayyyy... so Canonical have just blown a long-term release out of the water if one blindly accepts updates.

<sarcasm> Yeah - that's helpful </sarcasm>
:brickwall:

[malleus74]

I can't say much... I did the same thing! :)

I'm still working with this thread for couple reasons.

1. I think this mindset that "oh, problems like this are expected with linux. Don't like it, then go back to windows" is too prevalent and needs to be weeded out. If this is the mindset of the developers, then I'm sorry, but Canonical needs to be seriously worried.

2. I think this problem needs to be addressed with the kernel, and followed-through with all future updates, no matter if it's the kernel or not.

[bandyo]

I have the problem with the white screen: after the upgrade to 2.6.24-21 I was stuck with a white screen after logging in. I am running kernel 2.6.24-19 for now as that is running fine.

If I just turn off Compiz effects (after booting 2.6.24-19) and then run 2.6.24-21 I do not get the white screen, and I can then see that the problem is that there simply is no restricted driver loaded for the video card i.e. in System-> Hardware drivers there is no check box for the video driver, so there is no way to enable it (and I do not dare to try envy or such for fear of breaking my working video in 2.6.24-19).

It doesn't seem like a good idea to me to remove the restricted driver when running a previous kernel. Obviously the problem goes away when you simply do not use the restricted driver, but we are running the previous kernel because we DO want to use the driver...

I had exactly the same problem. Got the white screen after first update to 21. Moved back to 19 and disabled restricted drivers and lost it both in 19 and in 21. See my post above #152 for a possible solution.

Best

[the lush]

Well, I am not sure if the issue I have is caused by the kernelor by something else, but here is what I do know:

Hardware:

VGA: ATI HD3650
CPU: Intel T9400
Chipset: Intel 965PM + ICH9
Wireless: Intel 5100

With 8.04, I am able to at least get into the system, but without wireless LAN, so I cannot install any upgrades (my apartment has free wireless, but no wired connection.

With 8.10, I can only get a white screen.

It was my understanding that 8.10 added support for the wireless card I am using, but as I cannot even logon I have no way of knowing. I just can't believe that this bug which was listed on Launchpad in early September (it seems to be very common on ATI hardware) made it to production. On a previous machine using the same graphics chip I had 8.04 working perfectly, why was the bug introduced? More to the point, when it was known so far ahead of release, why didn't they either delay, or put a disclaimer that if you are using ATI you should not install 8.10? I have wasted too much time on this problem, and there is no doubt in my mind that this is the worst version of Ubuntu to date (I started with 6.06).

What I really need to know is:

1. Is this being worked on?

2. Will a new version of the install CD be released where this bug is eliminated, or do I need to give up on Ubuntu till 9.04?

[malleus74]

What I really need to know is:

1. Is this being worked on?

2. Will a new version of the install CD be released where this bug is eliminated, or do I need to give up on Ubuntu till 9.04?

PART I: :)

In this thread we started talking about the upgrade from 2.6.24-19 kernel to 2.6.24-21. The upgrade was listed as "recommended", so quite a few people clicked on it.

The upgrade was broke on a lot of our machines with various errors (including the infamous white screen you're talking about with Intrepid), but we were able to use Ubuntu by going back to the .19 kernel.

So far we've found the bugs on launchpad, and found the issues were already known before the update was released. To be honest, it kinda ticked off a few of us. Why release something that breaks a decent amount of machines?

Alexcckll contacted the developers (on of which, jdong, is on the staff here at the forums) where he was told, paraphrased, that they couldn't test all hardware setups.

We really never got an answer on why there's this much regression, and why anyone felt it was acceptable in this kind of business venture.

My unqualified opinion is everyone's concentrating on Intrepid (which is good in your case and mine, now), so Hardy's on semi-hold, except for side-benefits from their work on Intrepid.

PART II: :)

I'm not sure on your exact problem with Intrepid, but you might be able to follow a bit of the advice on this thread and rig it, maybe by booting off the CD, and adding a few options for your video at the boot screen.

I'm at work at the sec on a Windows system or I'd do a bit of searching for you right now.

[the lush]

OK, that makes things clearer.

I never got the chance to see if the kernel upgrade would have had the same effects on my hardy system as it did on yours, but I imagine it would have done.

So far I have not been able to solve the issues with 8.10 on my own machine.

[Apocrathia]

There was an oddity with today's kernel update that I haven't previously seen with any Linux installation, and I've been running Linux full time since 2002. I installed the update using the graphical Update Manager, then clicked on the reboot icon as usual and performed a warm reboot. After rebooting it was immediately apparent that all was not well - the screen was flickering, screen resolution had changed and going into System --> Preferences --> Screen Resolution, it became immediately apparent that Ubuntu was no longer detecting my monitor correctly.

However, before panicking, I decided to carry out a cold reboot and, after powering the machine down completely, waiting a minute or two then powering the machine up again, all was well.

I was just having this problem after upgrading to 8.10 through the update manager. Cold reboot with a 5 minute interval and everything is running fine again. Thanks!

[poudre]

Just to add my configuration that was working before the latest update.

Dell D531 - Ubuntu running .19 kernel last update was done 7/5/08.
1) The BCM4312 driver is no longer shown, so the wireless is not working. (Just a side note when I updated to .18 the wireless also failed and it turned out someone had decided to remove the bcm support in the kernel.)
2) The ATI drivers are no longer working, so I get a white screen when logging in.

So far I don't know what else is broken.. but I must say I am very disappointed that both times I have done an update with hardy heron I have
had to spend days trying to find and fix issues.
:(
So I hope once I figure out how to go back to .19.. I sure hope it works..:(

[alexcckll]

Found a good point here - http://smoogespace.blogspot.com/2008/04/fedora-bug-tracking-incident-tracking.html

Bug Tracking != Incident Tracking != Project Tracking - quite true.. what we need is an Incident Tracking view...

[malleus74]

Not a bad idea with creating overall bug reports... right now launchpad, pardon my mostly uninformed self ;) , is pretty difficult to navigate. I consider myself pretty intelligent even if not anywhere near a linux guru, and I hate that site.

I can imagine bug reports being dropped all over the place since there's a million bug reports on each actual bug, each just slightly different (or not) that have to be correlated.

A few years ago I remember there was work on a script that would compile a bug report for you and submit it... orl, or something...

[dgermann]

Hi--

Has there been any progress on fixing any of this? I have been holding off on three or four production machines till this gets resolved.

Alternatively, can the developers be persuaded to make the next release LTS, or even 8.10?

Thanks.

[malleus74]

If you've even scanned half the posts here, I'm sure you've seen how frustrated we all are. I'd love to hear from someone who actually is working on these bugs.

But, I'm sure most of the people who've posted either have moved to 8.10 (like me after enough errors but I'm willing to post here for however long it takes), or have figured out a fix or workaround (plenty posted above!), and/or went with the idea that "oh well, it's Linux. This happens."

And, I'm sure that I've not made a lot of friends in my criticisms of how upgrades are handled at the sec. I apologize, but I don't think a update should be released, much less listed as "recommended", when it's known how it reacts to a lot of systems. I don't think massive regression should be accepted as just part of using linux.

It's not acceptable.

I really think it's just an attitude that a lot of linux users and developers have... you have to know the command line, you have to understand how this or that works. If we upgrade, we should be aware of bug reports, conflicts, forum discussions, aware of recompiling all kernel modules, etc. 8.10 might at least get away from the kernel modules issue!

If we want this to be for the average pc user, we gotta get away from this. Don't remove any command or ability ... just make it 'easy' for the newbie.

Ubuntu, in my poor opinion, is the best so far with this. That's why Ubuntu is so popular!

And, I think developers have a great deal of freedom with linux on making decisions that might be great for their piece of code... and if it reacts badly with something else,... well, that's just the way it is.

[dgermann]

malleus74--

Thanks, malleus74!

I was afraid that was what the answer would be.

Actually, those kernel upgrades are now listed as "Important security updates." So it makes your argument even stronger.

1. One of the things offered is a new nvidia-glx-new driver--does anybody know if it is safe to install that, even if the kernel updates are not installed?

2. Would it make sense to wait for the next kernel release for 8.04.1 and see if it fixes or trashes things? These kernel updates seem to be coming every few weeks anyway....

[malleus74]

At this point I'd push backing up before doing any updates. Then, you could try all the updates, and they might work perfect for you. I'd also try a 8.10 live cd, and see how your hardware holds up. It might give you another future option.

BTW, I'm doing a test-run with 8.10... slowly customizing it for me, documenting each and every change, and backing up before allowing any and all updates. I'm seeing how long it takes to break... :) When I get to a decent point with it, I'm going to image it, create a /home partition, and post the entire process as a thread here.

So far I've run into the BadAlloc bug, and my machine is still sluggish... but everything seems to work... so far!

Let me know if I can do anything for you! I'm online a bit each night normally, and sometimes all day, if my work is slow. :)

[dgermann]

malleus74--

I might just take you up on your offer! Thanks!

Just ran a locate nvidia and there are so many files to backup, and so many kernel modules among them, that I think I will just pass until this whole thing is fixed.

This is the only machine that I run nvidia on, so I cannot test it on a non critical machine. Another alternative might be to work on it the Friday after Thanksgiving, so I have three days to fix things. Are you gonna be on line that weekend? <grin>

Just where is the long term support in lts, now?

[gry]

I accepted defaults for this upgrade and ended up with a machine that not only won't boot, I can't re-install either! I boot the cd and get the graphical menu: install, check cd, memtest...
But whatever entry I choose, I get a popup window with an OK entry -- which sends me back to the menu!

I'm trying to figure out how to use supergrub to wipe the whole partition and with it whatever corrupted grub files, even though that will blow away my home directory. Is there some other way around this?
[this is my first unbuntu experience -- not so good]

[malleus74]

Why don't you just delete the partition and remake it?

[gry]

>> Why don't you just delete the partition and remake it?

For one thing, I can't figure out how. Is there someway to do that with supergrub? I don't have means to write a floppy, so I can only use something I can burn into CD from windows.
I've already tried systemrescuecd, and koppix with no success, just kernel panics. Supergrub is the only thing I've been able to boot, and I don't see a way to wipe a partition with that.
And no, I don't have a windows floppy or CD.

[jdeal]

I have read this entire thread because I have ran into a similar but not exactly the same issues list. I have been running 2.6.24-21 for a few weeks without any problems. Today (11.21.08) I logged in for the first time in about a week and got the recommended security update + a few recommended. I have been doing the recommended updates since 6.06 LTS without a problem (on various machines). Installed the updates, rebooted, and no reboot. Just sat at Ubuntu boot screen. I did a <cntl><alt>F1 to get messages and read a series of ata errors. Tried rebooting again a few times with the same results. Tried the -19 kernel and got the same ata messages! I then attempted to boot off the CD that I initially installed 8.04.01 in live CD mode and got the same ata errors. To verify the hardware, I booted Vista (this is a dual-boot Dell Vostro 200) and it went fine. I started reading this thread and looked at the grub file. The root line was fine and the same on both -21 and -19.

After reading this entire thread and noticing a couple of posters stating after a cold boot it worked, I walked to my system and booted it and -21 booted successfully!

Now I don't know if I can trust this system. Any ideas?

Thanks to the posters for all the information in this thread.

[malleus74]

-gry

You should be able to use the partition editor when you're booting off the Ubuntu CD, by choosing install and then just deleting the partition.

-jdeal

I would beg anyone who decides to do an update to their system, regardless, to do a backup. There's a few (fairly) easy ways to do this, and a recommended way to install (that probably should be default in Ubuntu, but it's not) your system. I'm currently trying to fix the fact on the last update I installed, I lost my sound!

But, I do have a backup, so I could conceivably just start over and be perfectly fine.

I'm personally using remastersys, so that I can recreate all the changes I've done without a lot of steps on another system if I choose.

The thread below is probably the "right" way to do it.

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=35087&highlight=full+system+backup

On my computer's next reincarnation, it's definitely going to have a separate /home partition, so my re-installs are easier...

BTW: Welcome to the club! :(

[alexcckll]

I'm holding off doing any updates at all until this is resolved... and someone out there with an R61i can confirm that 8.04.x is safe to update.

[malleus74]

At the moment I'm still in the midst of customizing my 8.10 system, but it still has a few screwy quirks. The sound issue was that somehow one of the volume controls was muted... weird, since I hadn't muted anything. Of course I've already re-installed my sound system, etc, before I found it :)

At the moment I'd recommend remastersys to anyone... I just made a system backup, which burnt a 2 gig live image of my system to DVD... it's perfect.

If someone really wanted to upgrade, I'd recommend doing a remastersys backup first, so nothing would be lost, and then go from there... I definitely would NOT upgrade without a decent backup, EVER again.

[emanresu]

i installed the update yesterday (23/11), going from 2.6.24-16 straight to 2.6.24-21, and restarted without problem. i didn't realize what the implications of window for menu.lst does. it asked me if i wanted to keep the original or the use the updater's version and to look for differences. i went with the updater's version. this messed up my dual-boot capabilities. i fixed the menu.lst but left out the entries for kernel 2.6.24-18 and 2.6.24-19 when i fixed it. today when i tried to boot into -21 i got this error:

Checkroot: bootarg cat /proc/cmdline or missing modules, devices: cat /proc/modules ls /dev

Alert! /dev/disk/by-uuid/2948729c-1ca0-4451-8cd does not exist. Dropping to a shell!

BusyBox v1.1.3 (Debian 1:1.1.3-5ubuntu12) Built-in shell

i can boot back to -16, but can't get -21. i haven't even tried -18 or -19. i didn't see any reason to because i didn't intend on installing them anyway. are they necessary? is there a way to get rid of them? regardless, i'd like to be able to use -21, so one has advice for that, that'd be great.

[malleus74]

What I'd do is keep using the .16 kernel until they figure these problems out.

Also, I'm almost begging, install backup software like remastersys or learn to tar the system, so if these updates keep going bad, you'll have all your settings. I'd make a live-cd before I installed another update!

At least please make a backup of your /home directory. Remastersys will create a live cd backup of your system... I love it, after having these problems effect me.

[saffagirl]

OK, guys, thought I'd give a shot and update to 2.6.24-22 . Nvidia I think is running ok, didn't have any weird and wonderful screens like before. I still thankfully have 2.6.24.19 in grub and can confirm that all my same issues are present. I now have to do yet another fix for my sound, have no dvd video support... and have lost all my smart buttons on laptop..at least the wireless is working.

Man oh man, these kernel updates are doing my head in.I just one that will just work ...anyone else tried it and had success/ failure yet?

[dgermann]

Hi everyone--

What's the verdict on the new 2.6.24-22? Does that solve the problems of the 24-21 upgrade?

:- Doug.

[saffagirl]

Hi everyone--

What's the verdict on the new 2.6.24-22? Does that solve the problems of the 24-21 upgrade?

:- Doug.

NVIDIA worked no problem- I'm still having other video issues that are still ongoing from -21., What do you think? have you tried it yet?

[alexcckll]

I'm still trying to get my head around why there's vrtually no QA process about what goes in and the effects on end-user hardware.

SURELY a release-candidate process ought to apply around updates.. and not just "slip it into a pre-prod environment"... but test for all the updates hitting a putative build at once...?

I called my vendor and taking their advice to hold off completely...

[dullard]

The upgrade to -22 failed miserably here. I'm getting a white screen after logging on although the desktop appears to be loading as I see it briefly on screen when I Ctrl+Alt+Backspace back to the logon screen.

Previously I lost wireless access with the -21 upgrade so have been forced to stay with -19 since then.

Any ideas on how to lose the white screen? The wireless issue may be fixed with the latest upgrade but obviously I have no way of telling at the moment...

Cheers!

[dgermann]

Hi everyone--

OK, I gritted my teeth and installed the 24-22 upgrade on 5 machines, going from least critical to most critical machine.

There were no problems and everything seems to be running properly at the moment.

Two machines are pretty well plain vanilla 8.04.1; one is a laptop which is also pretty much plain vanilla; one is a server running the server version; and one uses nVidia drivers for its card in order to run two screens. This latter in the past has been something of a challenge, but not this time. All worked as I expected it to.

Note: I am running wired networking, so I am not sure how it would work with wireless, which some of you have had a difficult time with. Oops, I forgot, one is a System76 laptop and I just unplugged the wired cable--it was able to connect via wireless to the network and to the Web.

So far, all is well.

[Mark224]

I've haven't seen a white screen since I stopped trying to use the ATI restricted driver. I don't need 3D acceleration at the moment.

[jdeal]

I have read this entire thread because I have ran into a similar but not exactly the same issues list. I have been running 2.6.24-21 for a few weeks without any problems. Today (11.21.08) I logged in for the first time in about a week and got the recommended security update + a few recommended. I have been doing the recommended updates since 6.06 LTS without a problem (on various machines). Installed the updates, rebooted, and no reboot. Just sat at Ubuntu boot screen. I did a <cntl><alt>F1 to get messages and read a series of ata errors. Tried rebooting again a few times with the same results. Tried the -19 kernel and got the same ata messages! I then attempted to boot off the CD that I initially installed 8.04.01 in live CD mode and got the same ata errors. To verify the hardware, I booted Vista (this is a dual-boot Dell Vostro 200) and it went fine. I started reading this thread and looked at the grub file. The root line was fine and the same on both -21 and -19.

After reading this entire thread and noticing a couple of posters stating after a cold boot it worked, I walked to my system and booted it and -21 booted successfully!

Now I don't know if I can trust this system. Any ideas?

Thanks to the posters for all the information in this thread.

It looks like this is a issue with lack of support for IDE mode on the Dell Vostro 200. Fixed by going into the BIOS and changing the disk access mode (forgot the menu name) and change the mode from "IDE" to "RAID". My Vostro 200 now boots every time without error. This is suppose to break the Vista side (dual-boot system) but the Ubuntu side is much more important. Reinstalling Vista is reported to fix the Vista side.

I got this from one of the Dell forums. I thought I would post it here for future soles suffering from the same problem.

[malleus74]

That's a fix I'd never have thought of... keep the fixes coming! I'm sorry you've had to join our illustrious crew here...

[alexcckll]

I haven't accepted updates since that issue - is it now resolved?

Would I be safe accepting updates onto my Thinkpad now?

[gerben1]

I haven't accepted updates since that issue - is it now resolved?

Would I be safe accepting updates onto my Thinkpad now?

You can always just go with the upgrade and see if it works. In case it does not work, you can just switch back to using the previous kernel.

It may be annoying if your system does not boot correctly after a kernel upgrade, but by default you can always boot an earlier kernel.

The previously installed kernels are kept as backups by default. If you press <esc> during boot you will get into the grub boot menu, in that menu you can select an earlier kernel to boot. You could try this out, before upgrading, to check out the procedure (though you won't have much choice if you haven't any previous kernels installed).

Anyways, worst case scenario is that you cannot log into your system properly after updating the kernel, but if so you can simply press <esc> during boot-up to get into the grub-menu and select a previous kernel from the grub-boot-menu to boot. After doing so you can then ask around in these forums or elsewhere, to either fix your problem with the new kernel or to find out how to just boot the previous kernel by default in case the new kernel just does not seem to be working for your system.

[alexcckll]

Still scared to, as this is my sole machine. Has anyone else out there had a problem or complete success with a Thinkpad R61i type 7650-EBG with updates to 8.04.2?

[jimmy-james]

Just fell for the update last night. With 19, everythig was working great. I am a complete new user to Linux and am picking up the terminal commands through the forum and what not and basically got a clean install to pick up my wireless card eventually and then got the NVIDIA driver to work.
Got the notification that I had 263 updates ready and I scrolled through and when finding the kernel update, I foolishly thought that any official kernel update would be good to go and since I already have my wireless adapter and video drivers successfully installed, I could go with it. I can always uninstall it right?

Now, post install, I have more options in the GRUB menu to go with 19 or 21 and with 21, I have no video drivers and no internet access. 19 still worked until I installed the video drivers for 21. Then the video drivers for 19 didn't work.
Now, hours later, 21 has the video drivers and 19 does not, 21 starts 50% of the time but without wireless devices and both 19 and 21 give me an error when starting: "Failed to initialize HAL" which makes the distro freeze after a minute.

Seeing as how it took me days to get the wireless device to work after figuring out NDISwrapper wasn't installing for some reason and then another day to get x-server to stop and give me terminal instead of just locking up so I could install NVIDIA drivers, and then another day or two to figure out why I could not get an MP3 codec to install, it all seems like too much of a headache.

I want to like this, I really really do. I am just tired of trying a million things to get something to work and then wondering afterwards if one of the million items i did has affected 20 other things that lie in wait to screw up a future issue. I've typed in my password 12 billion times and wonder if it is all worth it. I suppose I will try reinstalling it all over again sometime in the future assuming my GF forgives me for all the "i'll be right there"s I have told her over the last 2 weeks so that I can spend another day redoing all the things I just did to get it to work.

Forgive the cynicism, for all its benefits, I laugh when I think about the fact I never thought I would ever say I wanted something to act like W*ndows in terms of its ease of use.
In retrospect now, I hope one day to not find this funny: "NOTE The kernel is frequently updated, and each update brings
better and better hardware support. This is one reason why you
should keep your system updated." (Ubuntu Pocket Reference Guide, Thomas)

In case it matters:
32bit 8.04LTS
dual boot XP/Ubuntu
2.5G 2core AMD
4GB ram
ASUS MB, onboard video (NVIDIA 7 series) on board sound
Trendnet TEW-423PI PCI

I did a search on the kernel release of "2.6.24-23" in synaptics (I realize I had newer kernel)
After re-installing NVIDIA driver, everything seems to be semi-working again. WOrst case: I reinstall ubuntu.

[Night Surfer]

Hi,

Please help: I have had to reinstall Ubuntu twice because of this update error.
My system freezes while updating and then when I pull the plug and restart I get the boot error.
I would like to run update (there are 283 of them) but if I end up having to reinstall again I am done (had alls I can stands and I can't stands no more).
So my question is this:
What are the exact names of the updates that I must un-check to insure this does not happen again?
Note: I don't see 2.6.24-21 on the list at all.

Thanks.

[malleus74]

@alexcckll HELLO!!!

Please bear with me, and I'll try to answer a few posts in one ):P I'm currently battling Intrepid, but this problem is still a sore subject with me :)

"You can always just go with the upgrade and see if it works. In case it does not work, you can just switch back to using the previous kernel. "

@gerben1 Well, this doesn't really work in some cases, as seen above. It killed my install, ie, why I'm on Intrepid now.

Please back up your system before you attempt ANY kernel updates. I'd burn this to a live cd thru remastersys if you're system fits the size requirements so nothing's lost. Squashfs will compress your system a LOT, but it has it's limits. I reached it a few months ago. If you're to the same spot I am, then please backup any means necessary. At least clone your home directory with all permissions.

If you want to take a shot at it, just allow all updates. If not ):P then I'd do one update at a time, and NOT allow any kernel updates... I'd do it this way since some updates might require the newer kernels, and they should flag.

"Forgive the cynicism, for all its benefits, I laugh when I think about the fact I never thought I would ever say I wanted something to act like W*ndows in terms of its ease of use."

:lolflag: @jimmy-james I've managed to blow up quite a few W*ndows installs over the years, too. My mother's computer has to be reinstalled if she uses Vist@ SP1... but that doesn't excuse this. I really expect better.

It's my humble opinion that the primary focus is on Intrepid and Jaunty. You can ask alexcckll... talking to the developers did not work the way we were hoping.

[alexcckll]

Hi Malleus - I let it update after waiting a few weeks... I generally do that if kernel updates come down.. allows for all the nasties to be picked up...

Running 8.04.2 now..