On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 11:47:18AM +0200, Luca Favatella wrote:
This patch fixes in the kfreebsd-i386 kernel udeb
* ABI (see also [0])
* a dependency version
Sorry for writing one patch and one mail for two fixes, but I decided
to do so because the fixes are very simple.
Looks fine; OK to
On 17/07/2009, Colin Watson cjwat...@debian.org wrote:
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 11:47:18AM +0200, Luca Favatella wrote:
This patch fixes in the kfreebsd-i386 kernel udeb
* ABI (see also [0])
* a dependency version
Sorry for writing one patch and one mail for two fixes, but I decided
to do so
On Tuesday 23 June 2009, Frans Pop wrote:
Also, the proposed kfreebsd-i386 file *is* different from all existing
ones (did you even see that?). I don't know why, but that would at
least have to be carefully checked. IMO it's not reasonable to dump
that on Luca, especially as he has minimal
Hello Frans,
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 2:34 AM, Frans Popelen...@planet.nl wrote:
IMO this is making a change for absolutely NO measurable gain at all. It
is also pushing work towards someone who has other goals than what you
are asking him to do, making his work needlessly complicated (as the
On Tuesday 23 June 2009, Otavio Salvador wrote:
I think we could merge the code in trunk also to make the kfreebsd
branch as small as possible and reduce the work for maintainence POV
from their developers (Aurien and Luca ATM). Doing it with a know
possible improvement is non-sense IMO.
That
[sorry for the double mail, I forgot to cc the list]
On 23/06/2009, Otavio Salvador ota...@ossystems.com.br wrote:
[...]
I prefer if Luca could fix it and get it ready so we can merge it in
trunk and make the branch smaller. It doesn't hurt either sides and
allow us to keep it going.
Done in
Hello Luca,
Please commit them on trunk since both looks OK from my POV.
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 8:30 AM, Luca Favatellaslacky...@gmail.com wrote:
[sorry for the double mail, I forgot to cc the list]
On 23/06/2009, Otavio Salvador ota...@ossystems.com.br wrote:
[...]
I prefer if Luca could
On 23/06/2009, Otavio Salvador ota...@ossystems.com.br wrote:
Hello Luca,
Please commit them on trunk since both looks OK from my POV.
Ok, thanks.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
On Monday 22 June 2009, Luca Favatella wrote:
This patch (against d-i trunk) adds a kfreebsd-i386 kernel udeb.
Your changelog here does not make much sense:
+kfreebsd-kernel-di-i386 (0.1) UNRELEASED; urgency=low
+
+ [ Robert Millan ]
+ * First upload.
+
+ [ Luca Favatella ]
+ * Update kernel
On 22/06/2009, Frans Pop elen...@planet.nl wrote:
On Monday 22 June 2009, Luca Favatella wrote:
This patch (against d-i trunk) adds a kfreebsd-i386 kernel udeb.
Your changelog here does not make much sense:
[...]
What could make sense is something like:
[ Luca Favatella ]
* Initial
On Monday 22 June 2009, Luca Favatella wrote:
Attached version 2 of the patch, fixing this.
Thanks. One more issue (should have seen that earlier).
The copyright file seems to have been copied blindly, which is incorrect.
These people clearly are NOT the people who created the package, and it
On 22/06/2009, Frans Pop elen...@planet.nl wrote:
On Monday 22 June 2009, Luca Favatella wrote:
Attached version 2 of the patch, fixing this.
Thanks. One more issue (should have seen that earlier).
No problem.
The copyright file seems to have been copied blindly, which is incorrect.
Hello Luca,
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 7:21 AM, Luca Favatellaslacky...@gmail.com wrote:
It builds with an unmodified kernel-wedge.
Good work; IMO the best way of doing it is to moving it to
kernel-wedge to make the work for other arches easier in future and
avoid duplication.
Rest of issues has
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 12:21:31PM +0200, Luca Favatella wrote:
This patch (against d-i trunk) adds a kfreebsd-i386 kernel udeb.
This work was done in the previous d-i kfreeebsd branch
(svn://svn.debian.org/d-i/branches/d-i/kfree...@47541).
I updated it, writing my changes in the changelog.
Hello Luca,
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 3:44 PM, Otavio Salvadorota...@ossystems.com.br wrote:
Good work; IMO the best way of doing it is to moving it to
kernel-wedge to make the work for other arches easier in future and
avoid duplication.
The only thing that could be done in kernel-wedge is the
On Tuesday 23 June 2009, Otavio Salvador wrote:
Hello Luca,
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 3:44 PM, Otavio
Salvadorota...@ossystems.com.br wrote:
Good work; IMO the best way of doing it is to moving it to
kernel-wedge to make the work for other arches easier in future and
avoid duplication.
16 matches
Mail list logo
