Le lundi 17 septembre 2012 à 17:47 +0200, Karsten Merker a écrit :
Systems _not_ working without firmware:
===
* Wrestler (Radeon HD 6310), part of the AMD E-350 APU
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=642389#5
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 12:07:46AM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
Hello,
tiny wrap-up for beta 2: the release happened one week after the
prospective date. Some tiny delays on various fronts added up and
explain that, but the overall results don't seem too bad to me.
That's why I'm going to
On Thu, 13 Sep 2012, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Mon, 10 Sep 2012, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
(replying to -devel and -boot only)
(I am not subscribed to -boot. Please keep -devel on replies, or CC me
directly).
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Mon, 10 Sep 2012, Philipp
On Sep 13, Wolodja Wentland deb...@babilen5.org wrote:
The main problem I see is that there seem to be essentially two types of
packages in non-free right now, namely those that contain firmware/microcode
(etc) and are crucial for correctly working hardware and the rest.
Yes, this was duly
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 11:44 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
Also, we should mention somewhere (the install documentation?) that
non-free should be enabled to install microcode fixes which may be
critical to maintain the system stability.
Could you elaborate on this please? I have been running
On Thu, 13 Sep 2012, Wolodja Wentland wrote:
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 11:44 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
Also, we should mention somewhere (the install documentation?) that
non-free should be enabled to install microcode fixes which may be
critical to maintain the system stability.
Could
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh h...@debian.org writes:
On Thu, 13 Sep 2012, Wolodja Wentland wrote:
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 11:44 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
Also, we should mention somewhere (the install documentation?) that
non-free should be enabled to install microcode fixes which may be
On Jo, 13 sep 12, 11:29:39, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
I think this should be mentioned somewhere *much* more prominent. I
consider myself pretty tech-savy, but only stumbled upon this just now
on the this list. Can a non-free package be made essential or
required? It seems there is really
On Thu, 13 Sep 2012, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh h...@debian.org writes:
On Thu, 13 Sep 2012, Wolodja Wentland wrote:
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 11:44 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
Also, we should mention somewhere (the install documentation?) that
non-free should be
On Thu, 13 Sep 2012, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
On Jo, 13 sep 12, 11:29:39, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
I think this should be mentioned somewhere *much* more prominent. I
consider myself pretty tech-savy, but only stumbled upon this just now
on the this list. Can a non-free package be made essential
On Mon, 10 Sep 2012, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
(replying to -devel and -boot only)
(I am not subscribed to -boot. Please keep -devel on replies, or CC me
directly).
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Mon, 10 Sep 2012, Philipp Kern wrote:
If we do that the same should also happen for
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 13:45 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Thu, 13 Sep 2012, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
I think this should be mentioned somewhere *much* more prominent. I
consider myself pretty tech-savy, but only stumbled upon this just now
on the this list. Can a non-free
Quoting Daniel Hartwig (mand...@gmail.com):
Is there potential to see pkgsel use apt-get instead of aptitude
(following the same change in tasksel)? There is already a patch
committed. I'll give this more of a test this week with some induced
errors during the installation.
I hesitated
On Sep 10, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh h...@debian.org wrote:
I'd like to see it recommend the instalation of (or just install by default)
system processor microcode update packages when non-free is enabled on a x86
arch (i386 or amd64) and the running processor is either Intel or AMD
(easily
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 12:07:46AM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
Hello,
tiny wrap-up for beta 2: the release happened one week after the
prospective date. Some tiny delays on various fronts added up and
explain that, but the overall results don't seem too bad to me.
That's why I'm going to
On Sun, Sep 09, 2012 at 08:38:38PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
I'd like to see it recommend the instalation of (or just install by default)
system processor microcode update packages when non-free is enabled on a x86
arch (i386 or amd64) and the running processor is either Intel
On Mon, 10 Sep 2012, Philipp Kern wrote:
On Sun, Sep 09, 2012 at 08:38:38PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
I'd like to see it recommend the instalation of (or just install by default)
system processor microcode update packages when non-free is enabled on a x86
arch (i386 or
(replying to -devel and -boot only)
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Mon, 10 Sep 2012, Philipp Kern wrote:
If we do that the same should also happen for firmware-linux-nonfree. Loading
the radeon KMS module without firmware available results in an unusable
(text) console. (Yes, it might
On Mon, 2012-09-10 at 21:10 +0200, Philipp Kern wrote:
On Sun, Sep 09, 2012 at 08:38:38PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
I'd like to see it recommend the instalation of (or just install by default)
system processor microcode update packages when non-free is enabled on a x86
arch
Hello,
tiny wrap-up for beta 2: the release happened one week after the
prospective date. Some tiny delays on various fronts added up and
explain that, but the overall results don't seem too bad to me.
That's why I'm going to propose the same timing for beta 3: 3 weeks for
development and bug
Cyril Brulebois, le Mon 10 Sep 2012 00:07:46 +0200, a écrit :
Features expected to be merged:
- UEFI support (Steve). Before anyone asks, and as far as I can tell:
it's not about supporting secure boot.
- IPv6 support in d-i (Philipp).
- Possibly more xz-related unblocks (Ansgar).
If
On Mon, 10 Sep 2012, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
Features expected to be merged:
- UEFI support (Steve). Before anyone asks, and as far as I can tell:
it's not about supporting secure boot.
- IPv6 support in d-i (Philipp).
- Possibly more xz-related unblocks (Ansgar).
If anybody wants to
On 10 September 2012 06:07, Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org wrote:
If anybody wants to see something land into this release, it would be
nice to mention it now instead of after the end of the merge window.
Is there potential to see pkgsel use apt-get instead of aptitude
(following the same
23 matches
Mail list logo
