[ d-devel removed, no reason ]
On Fri, 14 Sep 2007, Mathieu Roy wrote:
> Le vendredi 14 septembre 2007, maximilian attems a écrit :
>
> Obviously you missed Luk when he said
> >>The version specified is the version in testing...
and i told you as maintainer if that you should test the _newer_
Le vendredi 14 septembre 2007, maximilian attems a écrit :
> any unstable kernel installs just fine on testing.
>
> woow instead of loosing blabla time a simple upgrade could have
> been done long ago. i told you the reality 2.6.21 is _not_ supported.
> it is also certainly not the version with whi
[ removed useless -devel cc ]
On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 06:33:31PM +0200, Mathieu Roy wrote:
> I concur.
>
> But, still, clearly, one cannot ask for info, more input from the user, while
> at the same time disregard 99% of the info already provided.
>
> Well, I hope that you are right and that i
Le vendredi 14 septembre 2007, Luk Claes a écrit :
> Well for packages with many changes and many users it's not always easy
> to debug every single problem. So sometimes it's a great help if bug
> submitters test if the problem still occurs in the latest version...
Hello Luk,
I concur.
But, st
Mathieu Roy wrote:
Package: linux-image-2.6.21-2-686
Version: 2.6.21-6
Severity: important
stopped reading at that point, there is newer linux images
in the archive install them directly from unstable.
The version specified is the version in testing...
Amazing.
Tell me, are your trying to tu
>> Package: linux-image-2.6.21-2-686
>> Version: 2.6.21-6
>> Severity: important
>
>stopped reading at that point, there is newer linux images
>in the archive install them directly from unstable.
Amazing.
Tell me, are your trying to turn debian support/BTS into a joke?
If one need to run the bran
6 matches
Mail list logo
