On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 06:50:36PM -0600, dann frazier wrote:
The exceptions are:
* linux-kernel-di-powerpc appears to require a 2.4 build host - I've
poked around looking for help here, but no volunteers yet.
Still need help with this one...
* linux-kernel-di-m68k-* - I've just
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 03:41:42PM -0600, dann frazier wrote:
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 06:50:36PM -0600, dann frazier wrote:
The exceptions are:
* linux-kernel-di-powerpc appears to require a 2.4 build host - I've
poked around looking for help here, but no volunteers yet.
Still need
On Tue, Jun 06, 2006 at 01:32:42PM -0600, dann frazier wrote:
On Tue, Jun 06, 2006 at 09:23:45PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
The more arches are built by the same person, the easier coordination is.
So your offer is very welcome.
Note that you'll need to check out the kernel udeb package
dann frazier wrote:
On Tue, Jun 06, 2006 at 01:32:42PM -0600, dann frazier wrote:
On Tue, Jun 06, 2006 at 09:23:45PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
The more arches are built by the same person, the easier coordination is.
So your offer is very welcome.
Note that you'll need to check out
Karl Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
For people wanting to install Sarge on AMD64 I recommend using the
mini.iso found here:
http://amd64.debian.net/debian-installer/daily/netboot/
I did a sarge jfs on RAID with home on jfs/raid1/lvm with only minor
problems with this iso.
There should
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 09:33:54PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
That said, currently, backports are not an easy solution because of udev,
which cannot be taken as is without pulling in the whole gnome, so a
(Also replying to other mails about Sarge support in Etch installer)
On Wednesday 07 June 2006 20:42, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Frans Pop [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I ment that when you select sarge in choose-mirror in expert mode you
get the inofficial list and if you choose etch/etch+1/sid
On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 08:53:34AM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
installations which has only really been tested for i386. The real
downside of using the Etch installer for Sarge is that, although a
current kernel will be used for the installation, it will still install
2.6.8 for the target
On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 09:50:44AM +0200, Jens Seidel wrote:
On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 08:53:34AM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
installations which has only really been tested for i386. The real
downside of using the Etch installer for Sarge is that, although a
current kernel will be used for the
Frans Pop [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
(Also replying to other mails about Sarge support in Etch installer)
On Wednesday 07 June 2006 20:42, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Frans Pop [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I ment that when you select sarge in choose-mirror in expert mode you
get the inofficial
On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 01:33:57PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Frans Pop [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What changes are those? Is Debian finaly going to use LABEL= or UUID=
in the generated fstab?
I hope not; /dev/disk/by-* names seem a lot less kludgy to me.
--
dann frazier
--
To
On Thursday 08 June 2006 13:33, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
- increasing differences between the Sarge 2.6.8 and current kernels;
That is a reason for.
Only if we _would_ include some backports repository that is known to have
a current backported kernel and all other packages needed with
On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 07:16:57PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
On Thursday 08 June 2006 13:33, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
- increasing differences between the Sarge 2.6.8 and current kernels;
That is a reason for.
Only if we _would_ include some backports repository that is known to have
Frans Pop [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thursday 08 June 2006 13:33, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
- increasing differences between the Sarge 2.6.8 and current kernels;
That is a reason for.
Only if we _would_ include some backports repository that is known to have
a current backported
On Thursday 08 June 2006 20:08, Sven Luther wrote:
On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 07:16:57PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
Only if we _would_ include some backports repository that is known to
have a current backported kernel and all other packages needed with
that kernel, but without random backports
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
That said, currently, backports are not an easy solution because of udev,
which cannot be taken as is without pulling in the whole gnome, so a bit of
work is needed.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
What do you mean? You don't seriously mean udev depends on
For people wanting to install Sarge on AMD64 I recommend using the mini.iso
found here:
http://amd64.debian.net/debian-installer/daily/netboot/
I did a sarge jfs on RAID with home on jfs/raid1/lvm with only minor problems
with this iso.
There should be a mention of this iso on the main
On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 09:33:54PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
That said, currently, backports are not an easy solution because of udev,
which cannot be taken as is without pulling in the whole gnome, so a bit of
work is needed.
Friendly,
On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 09:33:51PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
On Thursday 08 June 2006 20:08, Sven Luther wrote:
On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 07:16:57PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
Only if we _would_ include some backports repository that is known to
have a current backported kernel and all other
On Tue, Jun 06, 2006 at 09:23:45PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
The more arches are built by the same person, the easier coordination is.
So your offer is very welcome.
Note that you'll need to check out the kernel udeb package sources from
the *sarge branch* of the d-i SVN repo for the
On Tue, Jun 06, 2006 at 09:15:44PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
I seem to remember though that the security update was planned for the end
of Debconf, so I was a bit surprised when reading my mail backlog this
week that it is not out yet.
That was the optimistic plan (I didn't mean to imply
On Tue, Jun 06, 2006 at 07:41:05PM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
Martin Schulze wrote:
It would be good if we would be able some day to release kernel
updates in a more timely fashion and also not accumulate this many
security updates in one update. However, due to the number of
dann frazier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Jun 06, 2006 at 09:23:45PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
The more arches are built by the same person, the easier coordination is.
So your offer is very welcome.
Note that you'll need to check out the kernel udeb package sources from
the *sarge
Frans Pop [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
(Removed irrelevant CCs for this question)
On Wednesday 07 June 2006 10:11, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
If possibly it would be nice to have different mirror lists for sarge
and etch/sid in choose-mirror.
This is not really a problem.
choose-mirror
On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 08:42:23PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Frans Pop [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
(Removed irrelevant CCs for this question)
On Wednesday 07 June 2006 10:11, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
If possibly it would be nice to have different mirror lists for sarge
and
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I ment that when you select sarge in choose-mirror in expert mode you
get the inofficial list and if you choose etch/etch+1/sid you get the
official one.
Might be too much work for a transient problem though.
I thought that installing sarge with
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 08:42:23PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Frans Pop [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
(Removed irrelevant CCs for this question)
On Wednesday 07 June 2006 10:11, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
If possibly it would be nice to have
On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 12:59:42AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
If using the testing images to install stable is not possible in the
future then we should seriously consider releasing images with newer
kernels in point releases or having D-I on backports.org.
This is being considered
I saw some questions on irc about the sarge3 kernel build r3...
zobel it's just, i actualy wanted to release sarge r3 with sarge2
kernels. now i get told sarge3-kernels are already prepared, which
disapoints me a bit, as noone told the stable release team
dann frazier wrote:
I saw some questions on irc about the sarge3 kernel build r3...
zobel it's just, i actualy wanted to release sarge r3 with sarge2
kernels. now i get told sarge3-kernels are already prepared, which
disapoints me a bit, as noone told the stable release team
On Tue, Jun 06, 2006 at 06:56:33PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
However, if kernel udebs should be part of the security update, then
we'll need proper source packages that build these udebs - or, if
these already exist, a pointer which source package has been forgotton
in the last kernel
On Tuesday 06 June 2006 18:01, dann frazier wrote:
I believed aba, joeyh fjp were all in on this decision, but apologies
if it didn't get communicated back to everyone involved.
That's right, aba agreed to this plan as representative of the stable
release team. Also, I posted an update about
On Tuesday 06 June 2006 19:22, dann frazier wrote:
I've offered to perform these builds for all archs except mips, mipsel
m68k (but I can help coordinate those as well - those arch
maintainers have always been very responsive to my build requests).
This offer is still open, just let me know
On Tuesday 06 June 2006 21:32, dann frazier wrote:
I don't think its very likely that amd64/sarge will be added to
debian.org,
I did not mean to imply that of course.
but this is a good question for the amd64.debian.net maintainers.
The main reason we need to know is that the d-i source
Martin Schulze wrote:
It would be good if we would be able some day to release kernel
updates in a more timely fashion and also not accumulate this many
security updates in one update. However, due to the number of
architectures and affected packages I'm not sure this goal can be met
any
35 matches
Mail list logo
