reassign 749014 src:linux
thanks
[Ben Hutchings]
Your mail server seems to be broken.
Right you are, thanks for the extra step to contact me via the BTS.
This should be assigned to src:linux not a binary package.
Also correct, I just didn't know offhand whether there was a way to
assign to
Package: linux-image-3.15-rc5-amd64
Version: 3.15~rc5-1~exp1
Severity: wishlist
CONFIG_USB_UAS (USB Attached SCSI) is apparently now solidly supported:
a patchset arrived in the 3.15 window to rewrite it and remove it from
CONFIG_BROKEN. Please add this to kernels that support USB 3.0 (it may
[Brad Spengler]
Frankly it makes more sense for me to offer .debs myself than to deal
with a bureaucracy and non-standard kernel in Debian. It contains
who-knows-what extra code, and I doubt anyone looked at any of it to
see if it allows for some way to leak information I prevent against a
[Goswin von Brederlow]
Where the relevant patches added to binutils and gcc for this?
See for yourself: http://sites.google.com/site/x32abi/
--
Peter Samuelson | org-tld!p12n!peter | http://p12n.org/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject
, since it was
unable to start sshd.)
--
Peter Samuelson | org-tld!p12n!peter | http://p12n.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
(to menu.lst or whatever).
--
Peter Samuelson | org-tld!p12n!peter | http://p12n.org/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Package: initramfs-tools
Version: 0.92o
Severity: normal
ext3 includes mount option 'data={ordered,writeback,journal}'.
However, it also has a restriction that you cannot change the 'data='
parameter with 'remount'. Therefore, you have to pass the correct one
at initial mount time, even though
[Manoj Srivastava]
a) How to configure which one of competing boot-loader scripts get run,
if more than one boot loaders are installed
b) Which initramfs generator gets run, if we have more than one
installed.
I'd vote for handling this with alternatives:
[Manoj Srivastava]
Given this official statement, I also suggest that the GR
proposal is moot, since the proposer himself believes that the kernel
modules in question can not be distributed by Debian legally.
There are a few firmware files which are sourceless but explicitly
_not_
[W. Borgert]
- Is it relevant, whether Python is compiled on a system with 2.6
or 2.4 kernel? If so, how can I find out on which kernel the
Debian package has been built?
Might or might not be relevant - depends on whether the python build
scripts attempt to detect the kernel
10 matches
Mail list logo
