Sorry for not replying sooner. If there had been anything really urgent I
would have commented, but there wasn't.
I did look at the new image and udebs earlier, but did not get around to
doing a full review until now.
The difference in image size between version 1 and 2 is about 400kB
Hi.
Frans Pop elen...@planet.nl (15/03/2010):
I did look at the new image and udebs earlier, but did not get
around to doing a full review until now.
In the meantime, NEW was hit several times, and almost every new or
reworked udeb is, or is going to be, available soon. I'll send a
report in a
On Monday 15 March 2010, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
In the end I used libnettle, statically linked (that's amd64 this
time, but you'll see the huge overhead of linking statically):
| Installed-Size: [-2204-] {+2208+}
libmatrixssl's headers were a mess, nettle is much cleaner, and
directly
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 12:10:38PM +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
It can be solved in two ways:
- have special *-udeb-pic debs (which should conflict with normal -pic debs
- do library reduction in a chroot of the image instead of using the host
system
mklibs don't needs to be instructed to use
Frans Pop elen...@planet.nl (15/03/2010):
When you have time, could you perhaps create a Wiki page under [1]
with info on how the X.Org backend is put together? I think would
be good have an overview of and to document the reasons for
differences with regular X.Org libs such as (config)
Hi,
Otavio Salvador ota...@ossystems.com.br (03/03/2010):
I think we should start adding them; in my point of view it is at a
good starting stage, even though there is space for improvement in
some specific stuff.
thanks.
If noone objects in 2 days, please go ahead.
Been busy with some
Hi.
Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org (27/02/2010):
now I've refreshed/rebuilt all udebs against sid. So here comes a
bunch of links.
I realized I might have failed to actually ask the question: should we
start adding all those udebs? Or does anyone have a problem with the
proposed plan?
Mraw,
Hello,
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 5:10 PM, Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org wrote:
Hi.
Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org (27/02/2010):
now I've refreshed/rebuilt all udebs against sid. So here comes a
bunch of links.
I realized I might have failed to actually ask the question: should we
start
Hello Cyril,
First I'd like to thank you very much to taking care of this huge work.
It is very nice to see all this work done in so reduced amount of time;
you're awesome :-D
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 11:49 PM, Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org wrote:
v2:
Total system size: 46198k (2,8M
Heya again.
Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org (27/02/2010):
now I've refreshed/rebuilt all udebs against sid. So here comes a
bunch of links.
And now a follow-up: speakup is now enabled again. I'm going to
emphasize what changed (top-bottom-line: not much).
Results:
New
Otavio Salvador ota...@ossystems.com.br (27/02/2010):
Hello Cyril
Hello,
I've commited a similar patch (yestarday?). I also did the changes
for the arches that were accepted.
I didn't rebase my patches, I wanted to really keep the changes
minimal. ;)
Mraw,
KiBi.
signature.asc
Description:
Hello Cyril
On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 7:27 PM, Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org wrote:
The speakup-disabling patch was replaced with a kernel-version-
switching one (0004-*).
I've commited a similar patch (yestarday?). I also did the changes for the
arches that were accepted.
--
Otavio
Hi folks,
now I've refreshed/rebuilt all udebs against sid. So here comes a
bunch of links.
Results:
New netboot-gtk mini.iso (checksum and sig in the same directory):
http://people.debian.org/~kibi/di-x11/2010-02-27/mini.iso
Stats:
13 matches
Mail list logo
