On Sun, Nov 26, 2006 at 07:25:27PM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > Hi, > > > During installation. How often does one install?
Holger, you should know i have installed that box maybe 4-5 times a day, and stayed in the installer a long time in order to investigate various bugs, including the infamous parted-doesn't-work-in-di one, which was trully bewildering. > Well, it does take a while :) Though when I installed mine, the > installer didn't work at all yet because the kernel was too old so I > built my own installer... I also occasionally hack the low level kernel > code so I guess I simply don't count as a user in this discussion ;) Indeed, but i guess that with etch now soon supporting 2.6.18 kernels, all apple powerpc hardware will be supported. At least this is one benefit of apple going over to intel :) > > AFAIK they are incuded in the sid kernels (at least, maybe etch too) and > > you > > can easily manually load them. Problem solved. > > Yes, I should have said "won't be loaded in the installed system". As a > user I'd have to know which ones to load which is a support problem we > wouldn't have if the installer just wrote the proper lines > to /etc/modules. I understand it does now, but I don't understand why Johannes, actually this is a different issue, the information has been sent to maks and the initramfs-tools maintainers since a couple of month. The therm_pm72 support was added, but to this date i don't think the various windfarm stuff has been added, despite me regularly pinging the initramfs-tools folk about this. You can easily add the following modules (and in this order) to your /etc/initramfs-tools/modules : i2c-powermac therm_pm72 windfarm_core windfarm_cpufreq_clamp windfarm_lm75_sensor windfarm_max6690_sensor windfarm_pid windfarm_pm81 windfarm_pm91 windfarm_smu_sat windfarm_pm112 windfarm_smu_sensors > such a trivial change is generating this much noise (actually, I have my > suspicions but that's beside the point). But then, I haven't understood > the whole noise and probably don't want to. > > That said, the time being spent on this particular issue alone would > suffice to fix the upstream kernel to auto-load the modules in question > based on smu sysfs nodes or whatever... (and in fact, that's the way I > work with(out) Debian most of the time; if something bothers me I fix it > upstream.) I doubt so, and as said it is an upstream matter, not a debian maintainer matter. Two different set of skills. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
