On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 06:04:14PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> I needed to make some small changes to build them as modules. The next
> upload using Linux 4.17 should include ashmem_linux and binder_linux
> modules for amd64, arm64 and armhf.
I looked at it, and it seemed like making the
On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 1:04 AM Ben Hutchings wrote:
> I needed to make some small changes to build them as modules. The next
> upload using Linux 4.17 should include ashmem_linux and binder_linux
> modules for amd64, arm64 and armhf.
>
Thanks for your time!
--
Best regards,
Shengjing Zhu
On Wed, 2018-06-20 at 16:04 +0800, Shengjing Zhu wrote:
> Hi Ben,
>
> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 10:46 AM Shengjing Zhu wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 01:09:39AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > I agree, I don't think it makes much sense to build these OOT if
> > > they
> > > can be built
Hi Ben,
On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 10:46 AM Shengjing Zhu wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 01:09:39AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > I agree, I don't think it makes much sense to build these OOT if they
> > can be built in-tree.
>
> Here goes the bug #901492 (linux: Please enable Android ashmem
On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 01:09:39AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-06-13 at 13:23 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > Hi Ben!
> > Could you please chime in to bug #901134 (RFS: anbox-modules)?
> >
> > This package wants to ship redundant copies of two modules (ashmem and
> > binder) that
On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 8:09 AM Ben Hutchings wrote:
[...]
> I do wonder what the value of enabling these as in-tree modules would
> be. I don't think we package the many Android userspace services and
> libraries that would be needed to run Android apps. So how would these
> modules be useful?
On Wed, 2018-06-13 at 13:23 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> Hi Ben!
> Could you please chime in to bug #901134 (RFS: anbox-modules)?
>
> This package wants to ship redundant copies of two modules (ashmem and
> binder) that are already in mainline since a long time ago. This strikes me
> as
Hi Ben!
Could you please chime in to bug #901134 (RFS: anbox-modules)?
This package wants to ship redundant copies of two modules (ashmem and
binder) that are already in mainline since a long time ago. This strikes me
as thoroughly wrong, yet I'm very ignorant about packaged kernels, thus I
On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 02:30:18AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > anbox-modules-dkms - Android kernel driver (binder, ashmem) in DKMS
> > format
>
> Could you please explain (here and/or in the package's description) reasons
> why an user would prefer this version of the modules over what's
On Sat, Jun 09, 2018 at 05:49:58PM +0800, Shengjing Zhu wrote:
> * Package name: anbox-modules
>Version : 0.0~git20180608-1
>Upstream Author : Simon Fels
> * URL : https://github.com/anbox/anbox-modules/
> * License : GPL-2
>Section : kernel
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: Chris Lamb
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "anbox-modules"
* Package name: anbox-modules
Version : 0.0~git20180608-1
Upstream Author : Simon Fels
* URL :
11 matches
Mail list logo
