On Sat, 9 Feb 2013 12:10:25 +
Alan wrote:
>
> Merged thanks.
>
btw for the ticket I added "merged for 0.17" in done but put its state
as todo/code as there are remaining items. Please fix if you think of a
better option.
___
tails-dev mailing list
Hi again,
On Sat, 09 Feb 2013 12:23:51 +0100
intrigeri wrote:
>
> Do you feel it's necessary to rewrite this branch history to clarify
> the commit message a bit? I don't, but I don't mind doing it if you
> think it's needed.
>
No with the explanation it's OK.
Merged thanks.
_
hi,
Alan wrote (09 Feb 2013 11:08:00 GMT) :
> The following commit seems me buggy: commit
> message doesn't fit commit content
> commit 9c96cb22904868771257f653936e0d7fac84f167
> Author: Tails developers
> Date: Wed Nov 28 16:49:45 2012 +0100
> Add compatibility sy
Hi,
On Sat, 02 Feb 2013 18:13:53 +0100 intrigeri wrote:
> hi,
>
> intrigeri wrote (11 Dec 2012 23:38:02 GMT) :
> > Else, I guess this will mature for 0.17.
>
> This matured in experimental for a while,
> then I've pulled a new upstream version or three,
> then it matured some more,
> then I've
hi,
intrigeri wrote (11 Dec 2012 23:38:02 GMT) :
> Else, I guess this will mature for 0.17.
This matured in experimental for a while,
then I've pulled a new upstream version or three,
then it matured some more,
then I've tested it again and I'm happy with it so far.
=> please review and merge fo
anonym wrote (12 Dec 2012 14:18:36 GMT) :
>> The way I understand it, those patches are only relevant if persistence
>> is activated in initramfs time. Since we activate it in user space, the
>> mounts are done on a visible part of the filesystem, so we're safe.
> Actually, the relevant patch,
> 0
12/12/12 15:16, anonym wrote:
> 12/12/12 15:01, intrigeri wrote:
>> anonym wrote (12 Dec 2012 13:22:49 GMT) :
I am unlikely to have time to test it before the freeze,
so "please review and merge" again if you feel like testing it first.
Else, I guess this will mature for 0.17.
>
12/12/12 15:01, intrigeri wrote:
> anonym wrote (12 Dec 2012 13:22:49 GMT) :
>>> I am unlikely to have time to test it before the freeze,
>>> so "please review and merge" again if you feel like testing it first.
>>>
>>> Else, I guess this will mature for 0.17.
>
>> I think the latter is the best.
anonym wrote (12 Dec 2012 13:22:49 GMT) :
>> I am unlikely to have time to test it before the freeze,
>> so "please review and merge" again if you feel like testing it first.
>>
>> Else, I guess this will mature for 0.17.
> I think the latter is the best.
OK. Thanks for thinking of it!
> It's n
12/12/12 00:38, intrigeri wrote:
>>> [...] However, I'm gonna call this a bug in live-boot instead.
>>> None of the persistence code has had the /live to /lib/live move
>>> made, and that would work around this potential aufs bug. [...]
> [...]
>> Looks good enough to me --> upstream.
>
> This is
>> [...] However, I'm gonna call this a bug in live-boot instead.
>> None of the persistence code has had the /live to /lib/live move
>> made, and that would work around this potential aufs bug. [...]
[...]
> Looks good enough to me --> upstream.
This is supposed to be fixed in live-boot 3.0~b9-1,
Hi,
anonym wrote (04 Dec 2012 17:20:11 GMT) :
> It seems you didn't test read-only persistence, cause it doesn't
> work any more.
You're absolutely right, I forgot or neglected this one.
> [...] However, I'm gonna call this a bug in live-boot instead.
> None of the persistence code has had the /
29/11/12 13:10, intrigeri wrote:
> Hi,
>
> ticket: https://tails.boum.org/todo/newer_live-boot/
> branch: feature/live-boot-3.x
> candidate for 0.16
>
> Tails ships a relatively old live-boot. We need to resync' with
> upstream. Aside of the obvious reasons to do so, the new version
> improves re
Hi,
ticket: https://tails.boum.org/todo/newer_live-boot/
branch: feature/live-boot-3.x
candidate for 0.16
Tails ships a relatively old live-boot. We need to resync' with
upstream. Aside of the obvious reasons to do so, the new version
improves resilience of persistent data in some cases.
I event
05/07/12 23:18, intrigeri:
> Hi,
>
> I spent some time adapting our stuff to the latest released live-boot
> developments. Please review and merge Git branch feature/live-boot-3.x.
> (Merged into experimental.)
Merged. Given how long it's been in experimental (which I know has been
tested extensi
Hi,
intrigeri wrote (05 Jul 2012 21:18:35 GMT) :
> I spent some time adapting our stuff to the latest released live-boot
> developments. Please review and merge Git branch feature/live-boot-3.x.
> (Merged into experimental.)
Ping? Note that this has been in experimental for 6 weeks.
Cheers,
--
Hi,
I spent some time adapting our stuff to the latest released live-boot
developments. Please review and merge Git branch feature/live-boot-3.x.
(Merged into experimental.)
A bit more similar changes will need to be done later for next
(unreleased) live-boot, given upstream renamed again in Git
17 matches
Mail list logo
