On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 09:01:53AM +0200, Arnaud Patard wrote: Hi,
> Simon Guinot <si...@sequanux.org> writes: > > Hi, > > > On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 11:19:43AM +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > >> * Simon Guinot <si...@sequanux.org> [2012-04-27 01:15]: > >> > On LaCie boards, the leds-ns2 and leds-netxbig drivers are used to > >> > configure the LEDs. This drivers are currently not embedded into the > >> > network-console installer. As a consequence, it is not possible to > >> > change the LEDs behaviour on LaCie boards when the SSH server is ready. > >> > > >> > Please, consider applying the attached patch. > >> > >> This patch is not correct: > >> > >> > --- debian/installer/armel/package-list (revision 18961) > >> > +++ debian/installer/armel/package-list (working copy) > >> > @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ > >> > # > >> > Package: kernel-image > >> > Provides_iop32x: rtc-modules > >> > -Provides_kirkwood: rtc-modules, jffs2-modules, zlib-modules > >> > +Provides_kirkwood: rtc-modules, jffs2-modules, zlib-modules, > >> > leds-modules > >> > >> This says that the LEDs moduleas are built-in, which is not the case. > >> You have to create > >> debian/installer/armel/modules/armel-kirkwood/leds-modules with a list > >> of modules. > > > > You will find in attachment an updated patch. > > > > This updated version is working as advertised. I'm not seeing any > led trigger in your patch, does this mean that built-in ones are enough? Yes, be able to turn LEDs off/on is enough. > > >> > >> I'm also not sure about the name leds-modules... maybe they should just > >> be added to input-modules or something but I'll leave that to the > >> kernel/installer team to decide. > > leds are more outputs than inputs imho. From the current list of udebs, > creating a new one sounds a little bit cleaner. Moreover one may need > more stuff later, like new led module or trigger. There are traces of a > beeper udeb so if we had a udeb like this one, I don't understand why we > wouldn't have a leds udeb. > > In the case I commit the patch, is there a bug asking to add support for > this udeb into d-i or do you intend to do it ? As soon as this patch is applied, I will fill a bug report for d-i. Simon
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
