Bug#954460: remove mentions of "volatile" repo from sources.list

Hello Cyril, > Would the following look like some reasonable middle ground? > > 1. Link to the wiki for the time being, getting rid of volatile, and > pointing users without any IP restrictions to some documentation. > 2. Get the ball rolling to update the devref. > 3. Switch the link from

Re: Remove of lilo-installer

On Wed, Apr 01, 2020 at 09:09:25PM +0200, Holger Wansing wrote: >Hi, > >John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: >> On 4/1/20 10:36 AM, Holger Wansing wrote: >> > Am Mittwoch, 1. April 2020 schrieb Steve McIntyre: >> >> Hmmm, OK. We should also file an RM bug *too*, I guess. Which image >> >> are you loo

Re: Remove of lilo-installer

On 4/1/20 9:09 PM, Holger Wansing wrote: >> udebs are loaded automatically as long as they are available on the >> installation disk and not excluded in debian-cd which is the case >> for amd64 [1] while lilo-installer is built for both i386 and amd64 [2]. > > Is that intentional then, or should a

Re: Remove of lilo-installer

Hi, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > On 4/1/20 10:36 AM, Holger Wansing wrote: > > Am Mittwoch, 1. April 2020 schrieb Steve McIntyre: > >> Hmmm, OK. We should also file an RM bug *too*, I guess. Which image > >> are you looking at to see lilo-installer in the menu? > > > > Hmm, interesting de

Re: Remove of lilo-installer

On 4/1/20 10:36 AM, Holger Wansing wrote: > Am Mittwoch, 1. April 2020 schrieb Steve McIntyre: >> Hmmm, OK. We should also file an RM bug *too*, I guess. Which image >> are you looking at to see lilo-installer in the menu? > > Hmm, interesting detail: > alpha1 or 2 netinst image for i386. > amd64

Re: Remove of lilo-installer

Hi, Am Mittwoch, 1. April 2020 schrieb Steve McIntyre: > Hmmm, OK. We should also file an RM bug *too*, I guess. Which image > are you looking at to see lilo-installer in the menu? Hmm, interesting detail: alpha1 or 2 netinst image for i386. amd64 however is not affected. Holger -- Sent from