|
From: Guillaume P. <gui...@gm...> - 2007-02-09 08:43:43
|
2007/2/9, Stefan Bruda <br...@cs...>: > At 15:02 +0100 on 2007-2-8 Guillaume Pujol wrote: > > > > What I forgot to mention is that, when I try 2.6.19, _sometimes_ it > > succeeds (boots succesfully) , and _most of the times_ it ends up > > with a VFS error. But maybe I'm doing something wrong ? Here is my > > .config for 2.6.19; I'd be happy if you find my problem, or give me > > your own .config for comparison: > > I don't know about others, but what is different between my config and > yours is that I compiles PATA support into the "ATA/ATAPI/MFM/RLL > support" (CONFIG_IDE=y) and not in the "Serial ATA (prod) and Parallel > ATA (experimental) drivers" (where I have only my STATA driver). I > don't know if this makes any difference, but fact is my 2.6.19 kernel > boots just fine. I am not sure what else you do different (and is > pertinent to the matter at hand), but if I discover something else you > will be the first to know. OK thanks you :) I think I'll jump directly to 2.6.20 anyways, so I hope I won't have this problem anymore. > By the way (and keeping in line with the subject), eliminating the sbs > module from the kernel makes some difference, but I still loose > battery information over time--happened last night actually, after > some 10-12 hours of uptime. That's really strange, I never noticed a problem with my battery reporting, including after some suspend/resume cycles and more than 20 hours of uptime. Here's my /proc/acpi/battery/BAT0/info for reference: present: yes design capacity: 55000 mWh last full capacity: 51270 mWh battery technology: rechargeable design voltage: 11100 mV design capacity warning: 250 mWh design capacity low: 100 mWh capacity granularity 1: 10 mWh capacity granularity 2: 10 mWh model number: ASMB012 serial number: battery type: LION012 OEM info: Sony012 Maybe we have two different models of battery... Regards, |