On Wed, Apr 07, 2004 at 12:34:33PM +0200, Michael Schmitz wrote: > > > You seem to be following this list :-) So doesn BenH, BTW. > > > > That is no excuse for a proper bug report. Such kind of things are much > > easier to miss or later forget if they are not properly filled. > > especially now that i am using the 2.4 benh tree, there should really be > > no reason not to fill such a bug report. > > Bug reports make the maintainers' life easier (unless you happen to keep a > close tab on list gossip), I grant you that. But users are reluctant to > file bug reports - first of all, what package to file against, how do I > figure out the version, better ask on the list first. Oops, now that I've > reported this strange behavior to the list, why jump through more hoops > and file a bug?
reportbug kernel-image-2.4.25-powerpc-pmac, and i will sort out stuff. Not reporting bugs and expecting things to get fixed is illusionary, > > > What you _could_ do is write yet another FAQ explaining what 2.4 kernels > > > > Thanks for volunteering my time, why you don't go ahead, and write such > > a document so i could include it in the debian kernel package ? > > Because I've got enough on my plate already? But nobody bothers to read > FAQs anymore, writing one would be a total waste of time. A nice README.Debian in the kernel-image package would be read i guess. > > > are expected to do (support ancient hardware well, period), and which 2.6 > > > versions to try instead. > > > > As there is no official debian 2.6 kernel yet (and probably wont be in > > Strange, I just installed 2.6.3-1-k7 last week on my Athlon box. Ah, and i suppose we are on the debian-k7 mailing list ? I was naturally speaking about the powerpc patch package. > > the near future if i have to loose time in writing FAQs and other such > > stuff you want me to), and as debian-installer doesn't support 2.6 > > kernels anyway yet, the point is moot. > > debian-installer not supporting 2.6 and X drm not working with 2.4 are > completely separate issues. Well, the thing that links them is that it is me who is going to solve them, and that my time is limited, and if i need to choose i will put debian-installer ahead today, and in a week or two, i may have forgotten this issue. > > For your information, my current priorities are getting debian-installer > > working on all supported powerpc hardware. We missed that with the > > beta3, so let's make sure this is not the case for beta4. Then getting a > > 2.6 kernel out, hopefully beta4 will include support for them already. I > > am also working on a ppc64 toolchain, so we can get ppc64 power3 and > > power4 kernels, see Benjamins remark about abandoning ppc32 support for > > those in the not so far future. > > I recall he said that. Thanks for clarifying your priorities. Has anyone > else volunteered to start on ppc 2.6 kernel packages yet? I will, Jens has also started looking at this, and the plan was for he to comaintain the package with me. there is no kernel-source-2.6.5 yet though, as the plan is to jump to this one immediately. Friendly, Sven Luther
