On Mon, Sep 26, 2005 at 02:35:00PM +0200, Norbert Tretkowski wrote: > * Sven Luther wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 26, 2005 at 01:55:51PM +0200, Norbert Tretkowski wrote: > > > * Andres Salomon wrote: > > > > I'm working on a backport of linux-2.6 for volatile; the goal is > > > > to not have it require any further backports. > > > > > > Just for info, I already prepared a backport of linux-2.6 for > > > backports.org, but I used a backported kernel-package for the > > > build. > > > > > > http://www.backports.org/pending/linux-2.6/ > > > > Is this the same backported kernel-package that i provide? Or your > > own stuff? > > It's a separate backport of kernel-package. > > > What do you do for udev and futur yaird/initramfs ? > > There's also a udev backport. And I need to add a yaird/initramfs
Can i ask you why you didn't use my own backports announced here a couple of weeks ago ? And reused by Simon Horman for his x86 stuff ? > backport when I add add the backport of 2.6.13. Cool. > > How does backports.org work? Is it autobuilt? If yes we could use > > that and forget about volatile for now. > > Not yet, but Joerg Jaspert is working on the setup currently. That would be great indeed. i wonder how we could get the powerpc64 flavour built in these condition, as it needs a powerpc biarch toolchain that is not present in sarge. Using the sid one is not such a problem, as this is a kernel package which is just built, and not linked with glibc. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
