Debian Bug report logs - #621036
udev should not assume that /run works just because it exists

Toggle useless messages

Message #5 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Gianluigi Tiesi <sherpya@netfarm.it>

To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: udev fails to load modules at startup: cannot create /run/udev//root-link-rule: Read-only file system

Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2011 00:04:18 +0000

Package: udev
Version: 167-1
Severity: grave
Tags: sid

I've just upgraded udev from 166-1 to 167-1, but udev is not anymore able
to load modules, e.g. network cards

166-1 was ok

but now even downgrading (dpkg -i of 166-1) udev does not solve the problem
(I've also called update-initramfs)

I think it's related to base-files 6.2 that added /run
I suspect the udev part in initrd should mount tmpfs on /run


Regards


-- System Information:
Debian Release: wheezy/sid
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: i386 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.26-2-xen-amd64 (SMP w/8 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1968)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash

Message #10 received at 621036@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: md@Linux.IT (Marco d'Itri)

To: Gianluigi Tiesi <sherpya@netfarm.it>, 621036@bugs.debian.org, base-files@packages.debian.org

Cc: control@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#621036: udev fails to load modules at startup: cannot create /run/udev//root-link-rule: Read-only file system

Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 02:58:31 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

reassign 621036 base-files
retitle 621036 base-files creates an unuseable /run, breaking udev and the whole system
affects 621036 udev
block 620995 with 621036 620191
thanks

On Apr 06, Gianluigi Tiesi <sherpya@netfarm.it> wrote:

Indeed this happens because your system has /run/ but it is not
writeable. udev does not depend on /run being available, but if it
exists then it must be useable. I do not believe this to be
unreasonable.
It was really stupid for base-files to ship a broken /run, but it is
still unclear what the best solution is.

> but now even downgrading (dpkg -i of 166-1) udev does not solve the problem
I can't see how this could be true.

-- 
ciao,
Marco

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #25 received at 621036@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es>

To: Marco d'Itri <md@Linux.IT>

Cc: Gianluigi Tiesi <sherpya@netfarm.it>, 621036@bugs.debian.org, base-files@packages.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#621036: udev fails to load modules at startup: cannot create /run/udev//root-link-rule: Read-only file system

Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 09:37:27 +0200 (CEST)

On Wed, 6 Apr 2011, Marco d'Itri wrote:

> reassign 621036 base-files
> retitle 621036 base-files creates an unuseable /run, breaking udev and the whole system
> affects 621036 udev
> block 620995 with 621036 620191
> thanks
> 
> On Apr 06, Gianluigi Tiesi <sherpya@netfarm.it> wrote:
> 
> Indeed this happens because your system has /run/ but it is not
> writeable. udev does not depend on /run being available, but if it
> exists then it must be useable. I do not believe this to be
> unreasonable.

I think this bug clearly shows that it is unreasonable indeed, because
currently /run exists but the package in charge of making it useable
has not been modified yet.

I just was told to create /run as a placeholder but certainly base-files
will not be in charge of making it work.

For this reason I fail to see how this breakage is supposed to be
fixed in base-files (according to your reassign). Do you mean that
base-files should also make /run to work? That *is* unreasonable,
a lot more than udev using /run without it being ready, IMHO.

So: Would it be too much difficult for udev not to use /run until it
is ready? I think that would be the best solution for this, so I
would ask you to reconsider this reassign that you made.

(Otherwise I will simply remove /run and leave it to initscripts. I
think that would be a pity, because it would be a sign of how inflexible
our software is).

Thanks.

Message #30 received at 621036@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: "andrea.de.iacovo@gmail.com" <andrea.de.iacovo@gmail.com>

To: 621036@bugs.debian.org, control@bugs.debian.org

Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 10:57:38 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

found 621036 6.2

thanks

Hi. I Don't want to interfere with the bug assignement but I'm tagging this
as found so that apt-listbugs can signal it and avoid other people to
install a package which can make their systems unusable!

Regards.

Andrea De Iacovo

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #37 received at 621036@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Norbert Preining <preining@logic.at>

To: 621036@bugs.debian.org

Subject: fixing it

Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 20:18:06 +0900

Follow up to this bug report: downgrading base-files and rm -rf /run
did help and get me back a running system.

<rant on>
Does the maintainer of soemthing like *base-files* at least *once*
reboot into his own machine before he uploads? It seems not so, that
is a bug that does effect everyone as far as I see.
<rant off>

Best wishes

Norbert
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Norbert Preining            preining@{jaist.ac.jp, logic.at, debian.org}
JAIST, Japan                                 TeX Live & Debian Developer
DSA: 0x09C5B094   fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76  A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SPROSTON GREEN (n.)
The violent colour of one of Nigel Rees's jackets, worn when he thinks
he's being elegant.
			--- Douglas Adams, The Meaning of Liff

Message #42 received at 621036@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: md@Linux.IT (Marco d'Itri)

To: 621036@bugs.debian.org

Cc: preining@logic.at

Subject: Re: Bug#621036: fixing it

Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 14:10:31 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Apr 06, Norbert Preining <preining@logic.at> wrote:

> Does the maintainer of soemthing like *base-files* at least *once*
> reboot into his own machine before he uploads? It seems not so, that
> is a bug that does effect everyone as far as I see.
In his defense, the bug only causes problems after udev is upgraded.
In my defense, I still believe that creating a broken /run is stupid.

-- 
ciao,
Marco

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #47 received at 621036@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Roger Leigh <rleigh@codelibre.net>

To: Norbert Preining <preining@logic.at>, 621036@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#621036: fixing it

Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 14:37:55 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 08:18:06PM +0900, Norbert Preining wrote:
> Follow up to this bug report: downgrading base-files and rm -rf /run
> did help and get me back a running system.
> 
> <rant on>
> Does the maintainer of soemthing like *base-files* at least *once*
> reboot into his own machine before he uploads? It seems not so, that
> is a bug that does effect everyone as far as I see.
> <rant off>

Hi Norbert,

I tested this patch several times before it was uploaded.  I never
once saw this behaviour, because it was introduced in the new
version of udev uploaded the day before, and so during the testing
period udev was behaving correctly.

The bug here is udev's misplaced assumption that the mere presence
of the /run directory implies that it is OK to use it, which is not
valid due to initscripts needing to set things up for this to work.
This would require udev to have a versioned depends upon initscripts
to guarantee that /run is usable, which is the way this was planned
from the start.  However, udev implemented (broken) support for /run
before the directory was even present on the system, which is the
root cause of the problem; udev appears to break systems pretty
effectively when it can't write to /run (it breaks at a minimum
loading of radeon/ttm/fbcon, networking and locks up the console
starting X, including the keyboard, requiring a hard reset; removing
/run fixes this).  This is a failure mode in udev which it should be
handling rather more gracefully; it looks like the /run support in
udev could do with some further testing.

The best solution here would be for udev to disable the use of /run
for the time being, and then once initscripts has been modified to
support /run (patch tested, currently waiting for maintainer upload)
it can re-enable /run support without fear of causing breakage, and
without the need to do any checks that /run is safe to use (though
for such a critical package as udev, it should probably test to ensure
the fallbacks don't break as at present).  I can additionally add a
Breaks: udev (= 167-1) to initscripts to ensure that udev is not using
/run during the upgrade, but we need a fixed version to replace it
before that can be done.


Regards,
Roger

-- 
  .''`.  Roger Leigh
 : :' :  Debian GNU/Linux             http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/
 `. `'   Printing on GNU/Linux?       http://gutenprint.sourceforge.net/
   `-    GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848   Please GPG sign your mail.

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #52 received at 621036@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es>

To: Marco d'Itri <md@Linux.IT>, 621036@bugs.debian.org

Cc: preining@logic.at

Subject: Re: Bug#621036: fixing it

Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 16:06:23 +0200 (CEST)

On Wed, 6 Apr 2011, Marco d'Itri wrote:

> On Apr 06, Norbert Preining <preining@logic.at> wrote:
> 
> > Does the maintainer of soemthing like *base-files* at least *once*
> > reboot into his own machine before he uploads? It seems not so, that
> > is a bug that does effect everyone as far as I see.
> In his defense, the bug only causes problems after udev is upgraded.
> In my defense, I still believe that creating a broken /run is stupid.

The directory /run is already created. If there are changes in udev to
make, undoing the change in base-files would be quite stupid at this point.

So, the issue now is: Can I expect an udev release fixing this in a day or two?

I would be willing to revert the change (temporarily) if the answer is no,
but as a courtesy to users of unstable, not because I really believe
the bug is in base-files.

Message #57 received at 621036@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Marco d'Itri <md@Linux.IT>

To: Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es>

Cc: 621036@bugs.debian.org, preining@logic.at

Subject: Re: Bug#621036: fixing it

Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 16:24:09 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Apr 06, Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es> wrote:

> So, the issue now is: Can I expect an udev release fixing this in a day or two?
Well, can I expect an initscripts release fixing this in a day or two?

-- 
ciao,
Marco

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #62 received at 621036@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Michael Biebl <biebl@debian.org>

To: 621036@bugs.debian.org, Marco d'Itri <md@Linux.IT>, Roger Leigh <rleigh@debian.org>

Subject: udev fails to load modules at startup: cannot create, /run/udev//root-link-rule: Read-only file system

Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2011 16:55:13 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

#issue 1: udev failing during boot
The bug is in the sysv init script for udev:
It has set -e and

    if [ -d /run/ ]; then
      mkdir -p /run/udev/rules.d/
      create_dev_root_rule /run/udev/
    else

This will obviously fail when /run is ro, the script will exit and as a
consequence udevd is never started.

This is the issue that was originally reported which breaks the system horribly
and is trivial to fix in the udev init script.

#issue 2: udev being restarted during runtime
as /run will be writable now, it will use /run and create a subdirectory
/run/udev, even if /run is not on a tmpfs yet.

This doesn't really break anything but clutters /run and is more a cosmetic issue.


I think Rogers' proposal in #620995 is reasonable. The udev package should keep
using /dev/.udev for now (even if /run exists). As soon as we have a proper
initscripts in the archive, udev can use /run and add a corresponding versioned
depends.


-- 
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the
universe are pointed away from Earth?

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #67 received at 621036@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Norbert Preining <preining@logic.at>

To: Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es>

Cc: Marco d'Itri <md@Linux.IT>, 621036@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#621036: fixing it

Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 01:16:12 +0900

Hi everyone,

On Mi, 06 Apr 2011, Santiago Vila wrote:
> So, the issue now is: Can I expect an udev release fixing this in a day or two?

I think my main reason of the post was to explain and make clear to
other users that downgrading both udev and base-files fixes the 
problem. Downgrading udev only does NOT help.

Best wishes

Norbert
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Norbert Preining            preining@{jaist.ac.jp, logic.at, debian.org}
JAIST, Japan                                 TeX Live & Debian Developer
DSA: 0x09C5B094   fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76  A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094
------------------------------------------------------------------------
GLENWHILLY (n. Scots)
A small tartan pouch worn beneath the kilt during the thistle-harvest.
			--- Douglas Adams, The Meaning of Liff

Message #72 received at 621036@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Chris Knadle <Chris.Knadle@coredump.us>

To: 621036@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#621036: lack of /dev/root also breaks Grub2's update-grub

Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 13:36:21 -0400

There are additional issues after installing base-files 6.2 and udev 167-1.
On the first reboot after the upgrade, udev /does/ start but does not start 
correctly; manually killing the three 'udev --daemon' processes and restarting 
udev via '/etc/init.d/udev start' appears as if it mostly works, as do 
successive reboots.

However, after the udev 167-1 + base-files 6.2 upgrade, file /dev/root is not 
created, which causes grub-probe to fail, and thus update-grub fails with an 
error (which thankfully reports the lack of /dev/root).

I think this bug is 'critical', as it is causing system breakage; udev is 
required to be able to mount filesystems via UUID.

  -- Chris

--

Chris Knadle
Chris.Knadle@coredump.us

Message #77 received at 621036@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es>

To: Marco d'Itri <md@Linux.IT>, 621036@bugs.debian.org

Cc: control@bugs.debian.org, Roger Leigh <rleigh@codelibre.net>

Subject: Bug#621036

Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 20:57:19 +0200 (CEST)

reassign 621036 udev
retitle 621036 udev should not assume that /run works just because it exists
thanks

I have just dropped /run in base-files 6.3.

But this is still a bug in udev. I still believe it makes no sense to
treat /run as if it was functional "just because it exists".

I will be more than happy to reintroduce /run once all the other
packages are ready for it, but this seems not to be the case right now.

Users of unstable: Please "rm -rf /run" and reboot. This base-files upload
is not supposed to fix your system for you, it's just for the benefit
of users who have not upgraded their systems yet.

Thanks.

Message #88 received at 621036@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: jidanni@jidanni.org

To: 621036@bugs.debian.org

Subject: unpleased

Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2011 17:38:50 +0800

Well gosh, you fellows took out my
*YouTube sound
*Trackpoint
Why don't you take out the network next time too so I can't write such nasty notes.

Message #97 received at 621036@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Drew Parsons <dparsons@debian.org>

To: 621036@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#621036: udev fails to load modules at startup

Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 09:13:00 +1000

jidanni wrote:
> Why don't you take out the network next time too so I can't write such nasty notes.

Well you're lucky. On my system it *did* take out the network...

Couldn't fix it until I got my hands on someone else's computer to learn
what the problem (and workaround) was.

Drew

Message #102 received at 621036-close@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Marco d'Itri <md@linux.it>

To: 621036-close@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Bug#621036: fixed in udev 167-2

Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 01:34:33 +0000

Source: udev
Source-Version: 167-2

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
udev, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive:

gir1.2-gudev-1.0_167-2_i386.deb
  to main/u/udev/gir1.2-gudev-1.0_167-2_i386.deb
libgudev-1.0-0_167-2_i386.deb
  to main/u/udev/libgudev-1.0-0_167-2_i386.deb
libgudev-1.0-dev_167-2_i386.deb
  to main/u/udev/libgudev-1.0-dev_167-2_i386.deb
libudev-dev_167-2_i386.deb
  to main/u/udev/libudev-dev_167-2_i386.deb
libudev0_167-2_i386.deb
  to main/u/udev/libudev0_167-2_i386.deb
udev-gtk-udeb_167-2_i386.udeb
  to main/u/udev/udev-gtk-udeb_167-2_i386.udeb
udev-udeb_167-2_i386.udeb
  to main/u/udev/udev-udeb_167-2_i386.udeb
udev_167-2.diff.gz
  to main/u/udev/udev_167-2.diff.gz
udev_167-2.dsc
  to main/u/udev/udev_167-2.dsc
udev_167-2_i386.deb
  to main/u/udev/udev_167-2_i386.deb



A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is
attached.

Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed.  If you
have further comments please address them to 621036@bugs.debian.org,
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Marco d'Itri <md@linux.it> (supplier of updated udev package)

(This message was generated automatically at their request; if you
believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive
administrators by mailing ftpmaster@debian.org)


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 02:31:04 +0200
Source: udev
Binary: udev libudev0 libudev-dev udev-udeb udev-gtk-udeb libgudev-1.0-0 gir1.2-gudev-1.0 libgudev-1.0-dev
Architecture: source i386
Version: 167-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: high
Maintainer: Marco d'Itri <md@linux.it>
Changed-By: Marco d'Itri <md@linux.it>
Description: 
 gir1.2-gudev-1.0 - libgudev-1.0 introspection data
 libgudev-1.0-0 - GObject-based wrapper library for libudev
 libgudev-1.0-dev - libgudev-1.0 development files
 libudev-dev - libudev development files
 libudev0   - libudev shared library
 udev       - /dev/ and hotplug management daemon
 udev-gtk-udeb - libudev shared library (udeb)
 udev-udeb  - /dev/ and hotplug management daemon (udeb)
Closes: 620995 621036 622180
Changes: 
 udev (167-2) unstable; urgency=high
 .
   * Only use /run if it is a tmpfs. (Closes: #621036, #620995)
   * Do not create persistent rules for Hyper-V network interfaces.
     (Closes: #622180)
Checksums-Sha1: 
 998d922f2c361d17fcbf5ef347da9a36ce70a781 1441 udev_167-2.dsc
 a59490348ed778f5e1ce54d9f68897dd19a862f0 86344 udev_167-2.diff.gz
 75ee1f598f97869f8ab8b4e94aca2efad0175012 520022 udev_167-2_i386.deb
 557280c824610cc6317f225bc99309180b5d9283 118856 libudev0_167-2_i386.deb
 32255d47c3a08c629542cbb01a6156c5027554c6 56556 libudev-dev_167-2_i386.deb
 1474470103b01a58a297552b1958e36df212f289 183878 udev-udeb_167-2_i386.udeb
 17e23f687ea44635e98e25c19133ea9ebe6fbf07 38560 udev-gtk-udeb_167-2_i386.udeb
 e8117288d9d4061673c928aa2456ba6e1cb6f0d3 104032 libgudev-1.0-0_167-2_i386.deb
 e7ba7551b71730678fbe13aa1680234737b68b9d 2958 gir1.2-gudev-1.0_167-2_i386.deb
 8d09b3f11a93ad3b64a89dc5b68cad9b2357d8eb 44254 libgudev-1.0-dev_167-2_i386.deb
Checksums-Sha256: 
 a7484afc5cb8934761eaaecf753c4f83d85bd956bd7f18c8b376d0ce580cdee2 1441 udev_167-2.dsc
 37fbff5fff24b981c0c8db2b7421fad9f78b4c995284c8b30cf6ac18f1ffa50d 86344 udev_167-2.diff.gz
 4ff9a754db3ebe05a9d64ce56d811d6b2486dcdccbd34261d60901591b3b7396 520022 udev_167-2_i386.deb
 72e978798446c4dfbd30036c5d6e4e5bdea40d4a91d78f28d8fdad33be608961 118856 libudev0_167-2_i386.deb
 2e439b308569df2a28cb17bfa32052ed12859951307e6eb056cb7583c9d2ae02 56556 libudev-dev_167-2_i386.deb
 0ea1fa7fd9ede5bbcf500c3d7cd6df83810327f75a4c1a2d8ed50aa1625cdd4f 183878 udev-udeb_167-2_i386.udeb
 13ff759fa7e0ec4b54174b987b1c512af8f782e1574b94c10ff4c75338fa230c 38560 udev-gtk-udeb_167-2_i386.udeb
 0fbcb106f7517f563b1b95b910be148d8ab9befc806a65a768a50f3d54b3650d 104032 libgudev-1.0-0_167-2_i386.deb
 61635ea2ea2b361cf00e957c1be4eb97e858064cb3710a07f2ee66560784e92a 2958 gir1.2-gudev-1.0_167-2_i386.deb
 b4d1d42ab1abf88e1d2882597c6c83edca9f4a7a09eda5e733356907d27ac87c 44254 libgudev-1.0-dev_167-2_i386.deb
Files: 
 2b47c2f58b4c5211ae25eab081786d58 1441 admin important udev_167-2.dsc
 6464ed378063125ef43597c6b3c52c0a 86344 admin important udev_167-2.diff.gz
 a98ef7ca62fa280132e710c0834c6fe9 520022 admin important udev_167-2_i386.deb
 f491d3b8deac178d3684b6c2653af6c6 118856 libs important libudev0_167-2_i386.deb
 50d02fbab281c28443b220dc07b7c4cb 56556 libdevel optional libudev-dev_167-2_i386.deb
 e15805f832763d2f0c6b252fadda191a 183878 debian-installer important udev-udeb_167-2_i386.udeb
 34ed1f736ec685b96c58ef97908e06e4 38560 debian-installer optional udev-gtk-udeb_167-2_i386.udeb
 ea75f56092f466035f4fe54fb3560b11 104032 libs optional libgudev-1.0-0_167-2_i386.deb
 17e5fa7198a4ab2791066b7adceb1529 2958 libs optional gir1.2-gudev-1.0_167-2_i386.deb
 a5783198c96ae2268aa57b850ec4edd7 44254 libdevel optional libgudev-1.0-dev_167-2_i386.deb
Package-Type: udeb

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAk2iUtcACgkQFGfw2OHuP7Gu/wCfa7HXAKHk0gZ5bJYDvHwBHV+A
3XYAnR998EQwrkJgYBF4TwJbM+RGxx5Y
=XJiO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Message #107 received at 621036@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Jim Thomas <debian-bugs@thump.dyndns.org>

To: Debian Bug Tracking System <621036@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: 167-1 in testing causing breakage

Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 09:06:30 +1000

Package: udev
Followup-For: Bug #621036

I just did a network install of testing, and found the new system had
no network, usb disk, and a locked up X server.

This was what happened on my unstable machine when udev 167-1 was
installed, and is probably due to the issues raised in #621036.

Testing now has 167-1.  We probably shouldn't have this version in
testing as there will probably be severe problems in most installs of it.

Jim

Message #112 received at 621036@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Ronan Brunner <ronanbrunner@gmail.com>

To: 621036@bugs.debian.org

Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 18:35:51 -0400

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Just did a fresh install using testing, and got this udev bug.  DOA.
Upgraded to unstable and I still cannot get any usb or ethernet
connectivity.  A very serious bug and cannot believe it is still around.

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #117 received at 621036@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: md@Linux.IT (Marco d'Itri)

To: Ronan Brunner <ronanbrunner@gmail.com>, 621036@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#621036:

Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 00:42:57 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On May 13, Ronan Brunner <ronanbrunner@gmail.com> wrote:

> Just did a fresh install using testing, and got this udev bug.  DOA.
> Upgraded to unstable and I still cannot get any usb or ethernet
> connectivity.  A very serious bug and cannot believe it is still around.
Because it is not. You are probably experiencing #624469.

-- 
ciao,
Marco

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.