XPost: linux.debian.bugs.dist   
   From: roman@oscada.org   
      
   This is a multi-part message in MIME format.   
   26.11.25 12:01, Salvatore Bonaccorso:   
   > On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 11:15:32AM +0200, Roman Savochenko wrote:   
   >> 26.11.25 10:06, Salvatore Bonaccorso:   
   >>> On Sat, Nov 22, 2025 at 07:40:33PM +0200, Roman Savochenko wrote:   
   >>>> Hi, Uwe Kleine-König   
   >>>>   
   >>>> 22.11.25 19:22, Uwe Kleine-König:   
   >>>>> On Fri, Nov 21, 2025 at 11:11:39AM +0200, Roman Savochenko wrote:   
   >>>>>> 21.11.25 10:35, Uwe Kleine-König:   
   >>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at 06:45:48PM +0200, Roman Savochenko wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> 20.11.25 10:38, Uwe Kleine-König:   
   >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 08:23:31PM +0200, Roman Savochenko wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>> 19.11.25 19:05, Uwe Kleine-König:   
   >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 12, 2025 at 06:19:07PM +0200, Roman Savochenko wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> 12.11.25 17:03, Christian König:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/12/25 15:28, Roman Savochenko wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 12.11.25 13:14, Uwe Kleine-König:   
   >>>>>>>> OK, and what do you want from me?   
   >>>>>>> Quoting an earlier mail in that thread:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> 	Can you try which Debian kernel was the last one working fine   
   >>>>>>> 	respective the first being broken in this regard? You can find   
   >>>>>>> 	all kernels onhttps://snapshot.debian.org/. Please ask if it's   
   >>>>>>> 	unclear how to do that.   
   >>>>>> I have told that as the kernel in Debian 11.   
   >>>>> Is that the last working or the first broken?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> The last kernel in Debian 11 (i.e. buster) is 5.10.218-1. Or do you mean   
   >>>>> the last in buster-security which would be 5.10.244-1? Or do you mean   
   >>>>> the one that Debian 11.0 was released with, that would be 5.10.46-4 (I   
   >>>>> think)?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> The kernels before and after that are depending on what you meant above   
   >>>>> 5.10.216-1 or 5.10.237-1 or 5.10.46-3 and 5.10.221-1 or   
   >>>>> 5.13.9-1~exp1 or 5.10.46-5. Which one do you mean?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> The gist to take away here is: Don't specify kernel versions as "the one   
   >>>>> in Debian 11" or "kernel 5" but use the proper kernel (package) version.   
   >>>>> Everything else is too fuzzy for me to work with.   
   >>>> And what that about when I have said that precisely???   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> Kernel 5 what? E.g. which concrete version number? (output of uname -a).   
   >>>> user@debian:~$ cat /proc/version   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Linux version 5.10.0-32-amd64 (debian-kernel@lists.debian.org) (gcc-10   
   >>>> (Debian 10.2.1-6) 10.2.1 20210110, GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Debian)   
   2.35.2)   
   >>>> #1 SMP Debian 5.10.223-1 (2024-08-10)   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>>> Parts of the misunderstanding here might also be a language barrier. So   
   >>>>>>> maybe try to get some help in the kernel community that speaks your   
   >>>>>>> native tongue.   
   >>>>>> So, English isn't native one for you? :)   
   >>>>> Right, and I doubt it's yours either. Or you would be the first native   
   >>>>> English speaker in my career that I fail to understand when   
   >>>>> communicating about Linux topics. (The only other explanations for that   
   >>>>> I can come up with are a) you suffer from dyslexia; or b) you write   
   >>>>> glibberish on purpose to annoy.)   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> PSA: This is my last mail to you for this bug until you come up with a   
   >>>>> statement like:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> 	I tested Debian kernel image package version a.b.c-d and its   
   >>>>> 	broken with the following symptoms: [....]. The kernel image   
   >>>>> 	that occurs in the list on   
   >>>>> 	https://snapshot.debian.org/package/linux/ directly after that   
   >>>>> 	(i.e. version e.f.g-h) doesn't show these symptoms.   
   >>>> As if I need your messages with your dyslexia... :)   
   >>> I'm closing this bug along. If you can provide the above version   
   >>> please respond to this message with the required information and a   
   >>> control message to reopen the bugreport.   
   >> Are you read the post in the middle or only the end with the trash from Uwe?   
   >>   
   >> Then read the part to which I have nothing to add!!!   
   >>   
   >>> Kernel 5 what? E.g. which concrete version number? (output of uname -a).   
   >> user@debian:~$ cat /proc/version   
   >>   
   >> Linux version 5.10.0-32-amd64 (debian-kernel@lists.debian.org) (gcc-10   
   >> (Debian 10.2.1-6) 10.2.1 20210110, GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Debian) 2.35.2)   
   >> #1 SMP Debian 5.10.223-1 (2024-08-10)   
   > Yes. And so you have then the last working 5.10.y version and knowing   
   > the next one released in Debian does not work. That means you can   
   > bisect now those two upstream stable series versions to identify which   
   > is the breaking commit with the described procedure to identify the   
   > breaking commit.   
      
   And you? :)   
      
   I very well know the bisecting approach, but I have no time, due to I   
   have many other unresolved problems to spend this time on them.   
      
   > Once we have those biection results we might get a better idea with   
   > upstream's help on what do do.   
      
   Once I fix that, I won't need your participation in whether pushing the   
   patch to the upstream or even starting myself builds, especially after   
   definition my as a liar by closing the bug with such reasons.   
      
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)