On Mon, 19 Sep 2005, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2005 at 04:09:50PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
> > what happened to the patch producing the small busybox deb
> > that iniramfs-tools needs?
>
> What is the problem with using the udeb?
>
> > did you accept the patch from jeff bail
On Mon, Sep 19, 2005 at 04:09:50PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
> what happened to the patch producing the small busybox deb
> that iniramfs-tools needs?
What is the problem with using the udeb?
> did you accept the patch from jeff bailey?
I don't find a patch or even bugreport in the bts.
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 02:25:12PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
> > On Mon, 12 Sep 2005, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > > Why do we need klibc for initramfs?
> > small size.
>
> LVM and multipath-tools are not built against klibc and the first don't
> su
In linux.debian.maint.boot Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Yes, from this thread it looks like we can start testing as soon as the
>dependency on a hotplug-udeb in udev-udeb is removed.
Done. :-)
Now I am working on a coldplug-enabled udev package, targeted to
experimental.
--
ciao,
Marc
On Thursday 15 September 2005 10:16, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> Proper hotplug support is provided by udev itself, hardware detection
> should come in ~1 month. Is this enough to start using udev in d-i?
Yes, from this thread it looks like we can start testing as soon as the
dependency on a hotplug-ud
On Thu, Sep 15, 2005 at 11:37:44AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Sep 15, Horms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Is there any work in progress to make hotplug not so damn slow?
> Yes. As I explained in another message in this thread and countless
> other times in the past, boot-time delays caused
On Sep 15, Horms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there any work in progress to make hotplug not so damn slow?
Yes. As I explained in another message in this thread and countless
other times in the past, boot-time delays caused by parsing map files
in hotplug will be cured by removing hotplug itsel
On Thu, Sep 15, 2005 at 10:16:16AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> In linux.debian.maint.boot Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> I think that d-i actually needs only the first item, and since it's not
> >> critical for many devices I will deal with it later.
> >> So the next udev-udeb packag
In linux.debian.maint.boot Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I think that d-i actually needs only the first item, and since it's not
>> critical for many devices I will deal with it later.
>> So the next udev-udeb package will not depend anymore on hotplug-udeb.
>
>The idea is to possibly sw
Marco d'Itri wrote:
> Thinking again about this: an hotplug udeb is not be strictly needed,
> because current versions of udev already provide the hotplug multiplexer.
>
> The hotplug package currently provides:
> - a firmware loader hotplug agent
> - support for hotplug of network devices
> - col
In linux.debian.kernel Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>there already is support for udev in d-i; what's currently missing is a
>udeb for hotplug.
Thinking again about this: an hotplug udeb is not be strictly needed,
because current versions of udev already provide the hotplug multiplexer.
Frans Pop wrote:
> - We do however assume we can keep on using the oldfashioned initrd
> support for booting d-i, so it would be nice if you were not too quick
> in disabling/modularizing needed filesystem support in kernel configs
> for 2.6.13.
> We do intend to switch to initrdfs for d-i
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 14:56:51 +0200
Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Should I keep cross-posting, or which of the lists is most relevant
> > for me to subscribe and for all of us to continue this thread?
>
> Let's keep main discussion on d-ker
On Tuesday 13 September 2005 19:32, Frans Pop wrote:
> Yes, we are aware of that. The missing udev is for hotplug on which the
> udev-udeb depends.
Eh, s/missing udev/missing udeb/ of course.
(/me thinks it is unfortunate that 'v' and 'b' keys are so close to each
other in this discussion)
pgp
On Tuesday 13 September 2005 19:15, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >A udeb for hotplug in unstable? Hmmm, packages.d.o makes no mention of
^^^
> > it and I could not find it on a mirror...
>
> http://packages.debian.org/unstable/debian-installer/udev-udeb
Yes, w
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>A udeb for hotplug in unstable? Hmmm, packages.d.o makes no mention of it
>and I could not find it on a mirror...
http://packages.debian.org/unstable/debian-installer/udev-udeb
--
ciao,
Marco
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscri
On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 03:38:55PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Tuesday 13 September 2005 12:01, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 11:17:44AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > > In linux.debian.maint.boot Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >Marco d'Itri has also talked abo
On Tuesday 13 September 2005 12:01, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 11:17:44AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > In linux.debian.maint.boot Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >Marco d'Itri has also talked about his plans to incorporate coldplug
> > >into udev. If we have co
On Tuesday 13 September 2005 00:13, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> In linux.debian.kernel Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >The major issue for d-i with 2.6.13 is the dropped devfs support.
> > However, there already is support for udev in d-i; what's currently
> > missing is a udeb for hotplug. What
> Should I keep cross-posting, or which of the lists is most relevant for
> me to subscribe and for all of us to continue this thread?
Let's keep main discussion on d-kernel. Both Joey Hess and I are
subscribed there, so no reason to CC us privately.
CC'ing d-boot when there are issues specific
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 19:52:28 -0700 (PDT)
Jurij Smakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One thing which I am not too comfortable with yet, is how we are going to
> switch to an alternative initrd generator in the kernel deb postinsts.
> The command to ge
On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 11:17:44AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> In linux.debian.maint.boot Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Marco d'Itri has also talked about his plans to incorporate coldplug
> >into udev. If we have coldplug, do we need a separate hotplug udeb?
> No, but the new col
[Frans Pop]
> The major issue for d-i with 2.6.13 is the dropped devfs support. However,
> there already is support for udev in d-i; what's currently missing is a
> udeb for hotplug. What we have was backported by Colin Watson from
> Ubuntu; for hotplug we can probably do the same.
If possible,
On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 11:56:03PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> The major issue for d-i with 2.6.13 is the dropped devfs support.
It is only disabled.
Bastian
--
No one wants war.
-- Kirk, "Errand of Mercy", stardate 3201.7
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Thanks to everyone for feedback. The situation is somewhat more clear now.
In summary:
* d-i is fine as far as we keep the traditional initrd support for a
while. As Bastian mentioned, it is pretty much guaranteed that it is
going to be supported until 2.6.15, which gives the d-i team some t
On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 11:56:03PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Monday 12 September 2005 03:23, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> > 2. What changes need to be done to integrate a new initrd-generating
> > tool into the kernel packaging infrastracture. It might be as simple as
> > switching the postinst of kern
In linux.debian.kernel Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The major issue for d-i with 2.6.13 is the dropped devfs support. However,
>there already is support for udev in d-i; what's currently missing is a
>udeb for hotplug. What we have was backported by Colin Watson from
Actually we have h
On Monday 12 September 2005 03:23, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> 2. What changes need to be done to integrate a new initrd-generating
> tool into the kernel packaging infrastracture. It might be as simple as
> switching the postinst of kernel packages from running mkinitrd to
> running yaird. I have no ide
#include
* Jurij Smakov [Sun, Sep 11 2005, 06:23:25PM]:
> Hello,
>
> As you probably know, the 2.6.13 kernel is out, and we are facing some
> problems with packaging it for Debian. A major change compared to 2.6.12
> is the discontinued support for devfs, which, I understand, renders
> current
On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 02:25:12PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Sep 2005, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > Why do we need klibc for initramfs?
> small size.
LVM and multipath-tools are not built against klibc and the first don't
support it.
> nice tools for initial userspace.
libc or too
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 12:20:29PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
> > as next step an initramfs-tools upload is planed for that week.
>
> Why do we need klibc for initramfs?
small size.
nice tools for initial userspace.
--
maks
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE
On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 07:10:43AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> A major drawback of yaird is lack of configuration. this has been added in
> latest release, and I have now spend all night packaging it, so should be
> available by tomorrow night in sid. Until then it can be grabbed at
> http:
Hello,
when we discussed the initrd issue yesterday, I tested yaird on my
ide-based laptop, and it worked fine out of the box.
I think we should have a closer look at it, but be prepared for problems
as already the package description states it is not well tested and
might have problems on SCSI
On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 12:20:29PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
> as next step an initramfs-tools upload is planed for that week.
Why do we need klibc for initramfs?
> ps we could simply reenable devfs in 2.6.13,
> as only the Makefile snippet was removed,
> but that's not a long-term option s
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005, Andres Salomon wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 11, 2005 at 06:23:25PM -0700, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > As you probably know, the 2.6.13 kernel is out, and we are facing some
> > problems
> > with packaging it for Debian. A major change compared to 2.6.12 is the
> > disco
On Sun, Sep 11, 2005 at 06:23:25PM -0700, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> Hello,
>
> As you probably know, the 2.6.13 kernel is out, and we are facing some
> problems
> with packaging it for Debian. A major change compared to 2.6.12 is the
> discontinued support for devfs, which, I understand, renders cu
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 18:23:25 -0700 (PDT)
Jurij Smakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> As you probably know, the 2.6.13 kernel is out, and we are facing some
> problems with packaging it for Debian. A major change compared to 2.6.12
> is the
Hello,
As you probably know, the 2.6.13 kernel is out, and we are facing some
problems with packaging it for Debian. A major change compared to 2.6.12
is the discontinued support for devfs, which, I understand, renders
current initrd-tools unusable. As I see it, there are two major problems
w
38 matches
Mail list logo
