* Bastian Blank ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060428 22:50]:
On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 08:33:38PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
A combination of a working patch in the most current point release,
documentation in the etch release notes and a conflict with the current
package in sarge might however do
Bastian Blank [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 08:33:38PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
A combination of a working patch in the most current point release,
documentation in the etch release notes and a conflict with the current
package in sarge might however do the trick.
Dear Bastian Blank,
The attached patch is a port of my original patch to the version in
sarge.
diff -u grub-0.95+cvs20040624/debian/changelog
grub-0.95+cvs20040624/debian/changelog
--- grub-0.95+cvs20040624/debian/changelog
+++ grub-0.95+cvs20040624/debian/changelog
@@ -1,3 +1,9 @@
On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 08:33:38PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
A combination of a working patch in the most current point release,
documentation in the etch release notes and a conflict with the current
package in sarge might however do the trick.
Dear grub maintainers
Can you please prepare
Bastian Blank wrote:
On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 05:04:53PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
waldi why not add your patch to update-grub to the next stable release?
Please keep in mind that you can't rely on a current sarge installation
when it is upgraded to etch, in other words, you can't depend
Martin Schulze wrote:
Bastian Blank wrote:
On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 05:04:53PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
waldi why not add your patch to update-grub to the next stable release?
Please keep in mind that you can't rely on a current sarge installation
when it is upgraded to etch, in
* Martin Schulze ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060422 11:17]:
Bastian Blank wrote:
On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 05:04:53PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
waldi why not add your patch to update-grub to the next stable release?
Please keep in mind that you can't rely on a current sarge installation
On Mon, 17 Apr 2006, Andreas Metzler wrote:
snipp
At short glance the respective changes in update-grub seem to be like
this:
-echo -n Searching for splash image...
+echo -n Searching for splash image ... 2
i.e. the newer update-grub is simply sending to stderr instead of
stdout.
This
On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 05:04:53PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
waldi why not add your patch to update-grub to the next stable release?
kernel-package 8 should be able to cope with the stderr output, no?
Yeah should work, but this have to be checked.
Bastian
--
Suffocating together ...
On Sun, Apr 16, 2006 at 09:59:55PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 12:29:04AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
For sarge updates of the linux kernels, grub needs to be updated before
linux-image*. Can this be forced by an conflict with older versions? A
dependency is not
On 2006-04-17 Bastian Blank [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Apr 16, 2006 at 09:59:55PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 12:29:04AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
For sarge updates of the linux kernels, grub needs to be updated before
linux-image*. Can this be forced by an
On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 12:09:27PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
kernel-package 10 uses debconf for the user communication. This
includes the pre and post scripts specified in /etc/kernel-img.conf.
update-grub from grub older than 0.97-3 writes informations to stdout,
which is coupled to
On 2006-04-17 Bastian Blank [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 12:09:27PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
kernel-package 10 uses debconf for the user communication. This
includes the pre and post scripts specified in /etc/kernel-img.conf.
update-grub from grub older than 0.97-3
On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 11:38:54AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Sun, Apr 16, 2006 at 09:59:55PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 12:29:04AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
For sarge updates of the linux kernels, grub needs to be updated before
linux-image*. Can this be
On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 12:52:11PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
On 2006-04-17 Bastian Blank [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 12:09:27PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
kernel-package 10 uses debconf for the user communication. This
includes the pre and post scripts specified
On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 01:51:30PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 11:38:54AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Sun, Apr 16, 2006 at 09:59:55PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 12:29:04AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
For sarge updates of the linux
On 17 Apr 2006, Andreas Barth wrote:
kernel-package 10 uses debconf for the user communication. This
includes the pre and post scripts specified in
/etc/kernel-img.conf. update-grub from grub older than 0.97-3
writes informations to stdout, which is coupled to debconf and
makes it fail.
On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 12:29:04AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
For sarge updates of the linux kernels, grub needs to be updated before
linux-image*. Can this be forced by an conflict with older versions? A
dependency is not appropriate.
Can you give more detail on why grub needs to be updated
On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 12:29:04AM +0200, Bastian Blank [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi folks
For sarge updates of the linux kernels, grub needs to be updated before
linux-image*. Can this be forced by an conflict with older versions? A
dependency is not appropriate.
Why does grub have to be
19 matches
Mail list logo
