On Wed, May 25, 2005 at 08:10:01AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 09:55:31PM -0400, Jurij Smakov wrote:
Any thoughts and ideas on this are welcome. As soon as the discussion is
settled, I'll try to write up the results in some more or less permanent
location.
Also,
On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 09:55:31PM -0400, Jurij Smakov wrote:
Hi,
Thanks to everyone who responded to the proposal on new uniform packaging
scheme. Below is the summary:
Sven Luther wrote:
To be absolutely sure that there will be no namespace collision between
this one and the
On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 09:55:31PM -0400, Jurij Smakov wrote:
Any thoughts and ideas on this are welcome. As soon as the discussion is
settled, I'll try to write up the results in some more or less permanent
location.
Also, it would be nice if we could aim at 2.6.12 for this, not sure if the
On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 08:30:32PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Thu, May 19, 2005 at 02:04:33PM -0400, Jurij Smakov wrote:
As you might know, we are planning a transition to the common kernel
source, which is expected to build all the kernel-related packages,
eliminating the problems
Hi,
Thanks to everyone who responded to the proposal on new uniform packaging
scheme. Below is the summary:
Sven Luther wrote:
To be absolutely sure that there will be no namespace collision between
this one and the flavour version, i would name it :
On Thu, May 19, 2005 at 02:04:33PM -0400, Jurij Smakov wrote:
Kernel packages are uniquely identified by their architecture,
subarchitecture and flavour. For most arches the kernel images are
built from the same source (upstream source with all-arch Debian
patches), using different
On Mon, May 23, 2005 at 05:20:06PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Thu, May 19, 2005 at 02:04:33PM -0400, Jurij Smakov wrote:
Kernel packages are uniquely identified by their architecture,
subarchitecture and flavour. For most arches the kernel images are
built from the same source
On Thu, May 19, 2005 at 02:04:33PM -0400, Jurij Smakov wrote:
kernel-headers-$(version)-$(abiname)-$(subarch)
A common headers package for an architecture with subarches.
Same purpose and contents as the one above.
To be absolutely sure that there will be no namespace collision between
On Thu, May 19, 2005 at 02:04:33PM -0400, Jurij Smakov wrote:
As you might know, we are planning a transition to the common kernel
source, which is expected to build all the kernel-related packages,
eliminating the problems with arches getting out of sync, etc.
Are the problems with 200
Hi Bastian,
On Sun, 22 May 2005, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Thu, May 19, 2005 at 02:04:33PM -0400, Jurij Smakov wrote:
Are the problems with 200 binary packages really fixed? If you want to
fix the problems, you have to integrate the udeb build process which
produces currently something about
Hello,
As you might know, we are planning a transition to the common kernel
source, which is expected to build all the kernel-related packages,
eliminating the problems with arches getting out of sync, etc. A
significant progress have been made in creating this source package,
the pilot version
11 matches
Mail list logo
