X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Received: by onstor-exch02.onstor.net 
	id <01C85F85.42E0E659@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>; Fri, 25 Jan 2008 12:05:33 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: interesting problem with CF and our production rootfs
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 12:05:33 -0700
Message-ID: <BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E056C9312@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
In-Reply-To: <20080125035500.2d84a30f@ripper.onstor.net>
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: interesting problem with CF and our production rootfs
Thread-Index: AchfSR2knpOX6U8sSEue+zP0YXotFQAPBf0A
From: "Larry Scheer" <larry.scheer@onstor.com>
To: "Andy Sharp" <andy.sharp@onstor.com>

I have no problem running dpkg -l.


-----Original Message-----
From: Andy Sharp=20
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008 3:55 AM
To: Larry Scheer
Subject: Re: interesting problem with CF and our production rootfs

Since your packages file is broken I can't tell what packages are
installed on our rootfs.  That problem has to be fixed.

On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 18:31:18 -0800 "Larry Scheer"
<larry.scheer@onstor.com> wrote:

> Right away I thought about our version of libc6. Does your "working"
> rootfs have our libc6 or the unmodified one?
>=20
> Do you have any packages installed that our rootfs doesn't have?
>=20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andy Sharp=20
> Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 6:10 PM
> To: Larry Scheer
> Subject: interesting problem with CF and our production rootfs
>=20
> I originally sent this to larry@onstor.com.  Apparently there is no
> such thing.  So now I'm resending to your actual email address in the
> hopes that Exgrunge likes that better.  Sigh.
>=20
>=20
> Hi Larry,
>=20
> It seems there is a bug whereby the pccard status interrupt is
> not being sent/received.  I spent most of my time in the office today
> isolating it to our production rootfs.  It works as desired with my
> hand made rootfs which I still have knocking around.
>=20
> That's as far as I got, but something about our rootfs is not as it
> should be.  Keep in mind that this is w/o running anything started by
> pm: I disabled pm so the system boots up but doesn't run pm or any of
> the stuff that pm runs.  So it runs our init scripts, and whatever all
> else is different.  I just don't know what the culprit is yet.  If
> anything springs to mind, let me know.
>=20
> a
