You are not logged in.
First of all, I've been watching this thread for a while and want to say thanks to everyone for their work tracking this down Here's hoping eworm's fix gets pulled into the next kernel release.
@PedroF, the pacman package now includes a really handy tool called updpkgsums, which will simply find the mentioned files in the sources array as well as the type of checksumming that is applied (ie. md5sum, sha1sum, sha256sum, etc) and fix things up for you.
If I'm not misunderstanding, this seems like a bad idea? While > 90% of checksum mismatches are almost certainly simple mistakes, part of the point of a checksum is to check that files haven't been replaced in transit by potentially malicious alternatives - so blindly overwriting the checksums to match what you have would be bad practice.
Obviously a tool like updpkgsums is helpful for the maintainer, but I wouldn't recommend using it at the client end
Offline
@PedroF, the pacman package now includes a really handy tool called updpkgsums, which will simply find the mentioned files in the sources array as well as the type of checksumming that is applied (ie. md5sum, sha1sum, sha256sum, etc) and fix things up for you.
Using that tool for downloaded packages is obviously a bad practice unless you're a maintainer.
The whole point of checksum check is to check if the file source wasn't compromised with an potencial malicious file.
Edit:
First of all, I've been watching this thread for a while and want to say thanks to everyone for their work tracking this down Here's hoping eworm's fix gets pulled into the next kernel release.
WonderWoofy wrote:@PedroF, the pacman package now includes a really handy tool called updpkgsums, which will simply find the mentioned files in the sources array as well as the type of checksumming that is applied (ie. md5sum, sha1sum, sha256sum, etc) and fix things up for you.
If I'm not misunderstanding, this seems like a bad idea? While > 90% of checksum mismatches are almost certainly simple mistakes, part of the point of a checksum is to check that files haven't been replaced in transit by potentially malicious alternatives - so blindly overwriting the checksums to match what you have would be bad practice.
Obviously a tool like updpkgsums is helpful for the maintainer, but I wouldn't recommend using it at the client end
You have covered it all ! Great post.
Last edited by PedroF (2013-08-23 09:29:57)
Offline
Thank you for uploading the patched kernel! Works well so far.
Offline
Yes indeed it would be bad practice to use updpkgsums blindly. But like many tools they can be used well or abused. I'm not advocating for simple getting a mismatch and then running updpkgsums without looking things over. But once you do and confirm that nothing has gone awry (you download it multiple times from a trusted source and get the same checksum for example), then updpkgsums can serve as a fantastic convenience over having to hand edit the file… not that that is much work either.
Offline
I've got a BCM4313, so my official alternatives were downgrading or switching to broadcom-wl (eww).
Therefore I decided to test eworm's patch for 3.10.9.
Since this morning everything is fine.
Last edited by sardina (2013-08-23 13:42:22)
Offline
I tested broadcom-wl; now I got kernel panics quite often during boot.
Offline
Asus 1215n here, reinstalling broadcom-wl seems to fix the problem for me.. no panics at boot, yet
Offline
Awebb wrote:eworm wrote:Updated my fixed kernel:
http://dl.mylinuxtime.de/arch/eworm/x86 … pkg.tar.xzAwebb wrote:I would test this, but my netbook runs on 32bit. Would you mind providing your PKGBUILD/tarball, so I can test it?
Did you receive my mail?
However, here is the updated tarball with PKGBUILD and file for anybody who wants to build:
http://www.eworm.de/tmp/linux.tar.gz
:-O
Thank you. For some reason, IMAP refused to do its job. Carry on!
Online
thanks, eworm. working nicely here.
Offline
So, does anyone knows if the last kernel released on [core] (linux 3.10.9-1) is already patched? I got the same problem and downgraded to kernel 3.10.5 (still there).
If I update it now to 3.10.9-1, will get it working? Or still crashing and resulting on kernel panic?
Offline
So, does anyone knows if the last kernel released on [core] (linux 3.10.9-1) is already patched? I got the same problem and downgraded to kernel 3.10.5 (still there).
If I update it now to 3.10.9-1, will get it working? Or still crashing and resulting on kernel panic?
It will still panic. Use my patched kernel if you want to update to 3.10.9.
ArchLinux - make it simple & lightweight
Offline
@eworm: just to say thanks! Your kernel works fine here. Thank you very much.
Offline
It will still panic. Use my patched kernel if you want to update to 3.10.9.
So, You mean I can just install your linux package, put linux on my ignorepkg and run -Syu? It will work fine?
Offline
I have problems getting my wifi (broadcom 14e4:43a0 / MacBook Air 2013) to work with the package broadcom-wl-dkms. After the installation, I was not able to see the interface with "ip link". "modprobe wl" yields "FATAL: Module wl not found". I also tried to enable the systemd service DKMS as was suggested in one of the comments of the AUR package, but this did not help either.
Any suggestions would be highly appreciated. Thanks.
Offline
I have problems getting my wifi (broadcom 14e4:43a0 / MacBook Air 2013) to work with the package broadcom-wl-dkms. After the installation, I was not able to see the interface with "ip link". "modprobe wl" yields "FATAL: Module wl not found". I also tried to enable the systemd service DKMS as was suggested in one of the comments of the AUR package, but this did not help either.
Any suggestions would be highly appreciated. Thanks.
A seperate thread would make sense. This one is about a very specific problem.
Online
eworm wrote:It will still panic. Use my patched kernel if you want to update to 3.10.9.
So, You mean I can just install your linux package, put linux on my ignorepkg and run -Syu? It will work fine?
It's the same package name and version, so you do not even nedd to ignore.
ArchLinux - make it simple & lightweight
Offline
@eworn. Thanks for your work with this. If not for you, I would still be a little lost. I had moved over to the broadcom-wl driver to get around this. Your kernel patches are definitely the way to go for the time being. Helped my poor little netbook.
Offline
eworm wrote:It will still panic. Use my patched kernel if you want to update to 3.10.9.
So, You mean I can just install your linux package, put linux on my ignorepkg and run -Syu? It will work fine?
Use 'sudo pacman -U /path/to/kernel/patch.pkg.tar.xz' to install.
Offline
Due to THIS other problem ; https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=1316568 I had to clear my pkg so basically I don't have any old kernel in the cache and http://arm.konnichi.com/ seems to be a parked domain. looked for out-of-synch mirrors but cannot find the 3.10.5 , where I can find the kernel to downgrade?
Offline
mrueegg wrote:I have problems getting my wifi (broadcom 14e4:43a0 / MacBook Air 2013) to work with the package broadcom-wl-dkms. After the installation, I was not able to see the interface with "ip link". "modprobe wl" yields "FATAL: Module wl not found". I also tried to enable the systemd service DKMS as was suggested in one of the comments of the AUR package, but this did not help either.
Any suggestions would be highly appreciated. Thanks.
A seperate thread would make sense. This one is about a very specific problem.
Done. See https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php … 3#p1316663
Offline
Due to THIS other problem ; https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=1316568 I had to clear my pkg so basically I don't have any old kernel in the cache and http://arm.konnichi.com/ seems to be a parked domain. looked for out-of-synch mirrors but cannot find the 3.10.5 , where I can find the kernel to downgrade?
This thread appears to have some useful information: https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=53665&p=10
Perhaps try this?: http://repo-arm.archlinuxcn.org/
If all else fails you could:
1. install linux-lts which is kernel version 3.0.93-1 and use that.
2. build your own kernel (Not all that hard, just can take a while to build.)
EDIT: Apparently you were unlucky as the guy running ARM has bowed out and the individual looking to replace him does not have packages that go far as back as the version we're interested. You'll have to choose one of the two options above unfortunately.
Last edited by nullstring (2013-08-26 11:42:13)
Offline
marcelokalib wrote:eworm wrote:It will still panic. Use my patched kernel if you want to update to 3.10.9.
So, You mean I can just install your linux package, put linux on my ignorepkg and run -Syu? It will work fine?
It's the same package name and version, so you do not even nedd to ignore.
Thanks, worked just fine.. Let's hope that I won't have thie kernel panic problem again when 3.11 comes to [core]. ;]
Offline
Thanks eworm, your patch works perfectly. I tried hard to stick with the official kernel upgrade with broadcom-wl, the b43 and b43legacy modules, etc., but none were able to pick up my wireless card. In the end I wound up downloading eworm's patch and trying it, and no issues so far.
Edit: I'm on a Dell Latitude E6510 with a Broadcom 4313, for anyone else with this issue.
Last edited by thechancellor (2013-08-27 00:58:39)
Offline
ArchLinux - make it simple & lightweight
Offline
Thanks - I was using the LTS kernel to work around this on my i686 netbook (mostly on the grounds that trying to compile on it would be hilariously slow and the LTS one works with that hardware decently). Does anyone know about the progress on getting this fixed in the mainline kernel? My googling indicates it might be fixed in 3.11...
Avatar by Ditey: https://twitter.com/phrobitey
Offline