Bug#858849: installation-reports: Successful Jessie installation with backported kernel 4.9.16-1+reiser4.0.1 on i915 system AMD64

Hi, Metztli Information Technology (2017-03-27): > Boot method: CD/USB > Image version: https://metztli.it/readOnlyEphemeral/xiuhcohuatl.iso built on > Mar 25 08:35 (2017) > Date: Mar 26, 2017, 01:49 A couple of months ago, I asked: | Do we need to get installation reports

B2B contact list

Hi, Would you be interested in acquiring any of the updated contact databases of below specified titles that will add great value to your marketing programs? We can segment Industry List & Technology Users List by C-level, VP-level, Director-Level and Manager Level as per your requirements.

Bug#858849: installation-reports: Successful Jessie installation with backported kernel 4.9.16-1+reiser4.0.1 on i915 system AMD64

Package: installation-reports Severity: normal Dear Maintainer, *** Reporter, please consider answering these questions, where appropriate *** * What led up to the situation? * What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or ineffective)? * What was the outcome of this

Re: 8.8 planning

On Tue, 2017-03-14 at 12:00 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote: > It's time to start thinking about our next stable point > release.  Here > are some dates, please let us know which ones would work. > > * April 8-9 Not ideal, but should work. > * April 15-16 Only on 16th. > * April 22-23 > * April

Bug#749991: Wrong kernel in debian-installer package

On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 12:54:18PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: > > > One can always use http://snapshot.debian.org/ as one's mirror and > > specify a dated URL that matches the ISO's creation date. > I think (based on the last few paragraphs in the "Usage" section of > that URL) that one would also

Bug#749991: Wrong kernel in debian-installer package

On Mon, 2017-03-27 at 13:32 +0200, Philip Hands wrote: > > Alexander Sosedkin writes: > > > On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 12:43:40 +0200 > > > > Philipp Kern wrote: > > > > > Even if we'd leave the old kernel udebs in testing for a while, you'd  > > > still hit a

Bug#749991: Wrong kernel in debian-installer package

On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:32:46 +0200 Philip Hands wrote: > Alexander Sosedkin writes: > > > On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 12:43:40 +0200 > > Philipp Kern wrote: > > > >> Even if we'd leave the old kernel udebs in testing for a while, > >> you'd

Bug#749991: Wrong kernel in debian-installer package

Alexander Sosedkin writes: > On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 12:43:40 +0200 > Philipp Kern wrote: > >> Even if we'd leave the old kernel udebs in testing for a while, you'd >> still hit a point where we'd need to drop them and old installers >> would break. > > I can

Bug#749991: Wrong kernel in debian-installer package

On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 12:43:40 +0200 Philipp Kern wrote: > Even if we'd leave the old kernel udebs in testing for a while, you'd > still hit a point where we'd need to drop them and old installers > would break. I can see that it's impossible to support downloading modules for

Bug#749991: Wrong kernel in debian-installer package

On 2017-03-27 11:56, Nye Liu wrote: The reason I ask is because I have custom grub menu configs that I don't want to constantly hand edit or patch on a cron job along with a cron to download the dailies... and then have no idea if the cron will do the right thing, or if the daily even works.

Bug#749991: Wrong kernel in debian-installer package

Thanks for your response. On Sun, 26 Mar 2017 18:31:45 +0200 Philipp Kern wrote: > IOW: Is there a way to guarantee that > (dist)/main/installer-amd64/current/images/netboot/netboot.tar.gz does not > contain a kernel that has no modules package IN THAT SAME mirror? > > Or

Bug#857132: console-setup: additional info needed ?

On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 08:18:16PM +0200, Karsten Hilbert wrote: > One thing I *haven't* tested yet is whether earlier kernel > would make a difference -- not that I would think but who > knows. Just for kicks I booted all kernels installed on this machine (all prior experimentation was done