Bug#547995: kbd-chooser: Please support sh4
Quoting Nobuhiro Iwamatsu (iwama...@nigauri.org): > > kbd-chooser is only useful for the installer. Would that mean you also > > plan to work on sh4 support in D-I? > > Yes. I want to support sh4 in D-I. Well, I personnally know nothing about the architecture and its use but I think it's probably a good thing anyway..:-) I suggest you provide patches for D-I components just as you did and after enough of them have been reviewed, we should probably grant you commit access on the SVN repo... (which will probably be a GIT repo by thenthus making it easier to create branches...for instance when working on a new architecture support) signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#547995: kbd-chooser: Please support sh4
Hi, 2009/9/23 Christian Perrier : > Quoting Nobuhiro Iwamatsu (iwama...@nigauri.org): >> Package: kbd-chooser >> Version: 1.48 >> Severity: wishlist >> User: debian-...@superh.org >> Usertags: sh4 >> >> Hi, >> >> I am now trying to run Debian on Renesas SH(sh4) CPU. >> kbd-chooser can build on sh4. I attached build log. >> Could you add sh4 into support architecture list? > > > kbd-chooser is only useful for the installer. Would that mean you also > plan to work on sh4 support in D-I? Yes. I want to support sh4 in D-I. -- Nobuhiro Iwamatsu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#547995: kbd-chooser: Please support sh4
Hi, 2009/9/23 Christian Perrier : > Quoting Nobuhiro Iwamatsu (iwama...@nigauri.org): > >> > kbd-chooser is only useful for the installer. Would that mean you also >> > plan to work on sh4 support in D-I? >> >> Yes. I want to support sh4 in D-I. > > > Well, I personnally know nothing about the architecture and its use > but I think it's probably a good thing anyway..:-) > > I suggest you provide patches for D-I components just as you did and > after enough of them have been reviewed, we should probably grant you > commit access on the SVN repo... > > (which will probably be a GIT repo by thenthus making it easier to > create branches...for instance when working on a new architecture support) I understood it. The porting to sh4 is still not enough. When sh4 was necessary in D-I, I wrestle with this problem again. Please set pending this bug. Thanks, Nobuhiro -- Nobuhiro Iwamatsu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Processing of partman-partitioning_72_i386.changes
partman-partitioning_72_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: partman-partitioning_72.dsc partman-partitioning_72.tar.gz partman-partitioning_72_i386.udeb Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon (running on host ries.debian.org) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Processing of partman-target_64_i386.changes
partman-target_64_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: partman-target_64.dsc partman-target_64.tar.gz partman-target_64_all.udeb Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon (running on host ries.debian.org) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
partman-partitioning_72_i386.changes ACCEPTED
Accepted: partman-partitioning_72.dsc to pool/main/p/partman-partitioning/partman-partitioning_72.dsc partman-partitioning_72.tar.gz to pool/main/p/partman-partitioning/partman-partitioning_72.tar.gz partman-partitioning_72_i386.udeb to pool/main/p/partman-partitioning/partman-partitioning_72_i386.udeb Override entries for your package: partman-partitioning_72.dsc - source debian-installer partman-partitioning_72_i386.udeb - optional debian-installer Announcing to debian-devel-chan...@lists.debian.org Thank you for your contribution to Debian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
partman-target_64_i386.changes ACCEPTED
Accepted: partman-target_64.dsc to pool/main/p/partman-target/partman-target_64.dsc partman-target_64.tar.gz to pool/main/p/partman-target/partman-target_64.tar.gz partman-target_64_all.udeb to pool/main/p/partman-target/partman-target_64_all.udeb Override entries for your package: partman-target_64.dsc - source debian-installer partman-target_64_all.udeb - standard debian-installer Announcing to debian-devel-chan...@lists.debian.org Thank you for your contribution to Debian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#547731: Please include b43 in nic-wireless-modules
If noone objects I think it is worth since it is a quite adaptor in new netbooks. On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Max Vozeler wrote: > On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 11:58:35PM +0200, Max Vozeler wrote: >> Seems reasonable to include b43 in nic-wireless-modules. > > I checked the changes this implies with 2.6.30-1-amd64: > > - Depends on two other modules: rng-core, ssb > > - Installed-Size of nic-wireless-modules grows by 292k total > > - b43 depends on pcmcia, so nic-wireless-modules will need to > depend no pcmcia-modules. > > Does this sound reasonable? > > Max > -- Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems E-mail: ota...@ossystems.com.br http://www.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854 http://projetos.ossystems.com.br -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#548038: Installation failed: dpkg: not found
Package: debootstrap Severity: grave Debian businesscard 20090923-1 i386, Virtualbox 3.0.6 See also bug #547780 Cheers, Darkbasic -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#548038: marked as done (Installation failed: dpkg: not found)
Your message dated Wed, 23 Sep 2009 15:25:32 +0200 with message-id <1253712332.4290.3.ca...@fz.local> and subject line Re: Bug#548038: Installation failed: dpkg: not found has caused the Debian Bug report #548038, regarding Installation failed: dpkg: not found to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 548038: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=548038 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: debootstrap Severity: grave Debian businesscard 20090923-1 i386, Virtualbox 3.0.6 See also bug #547780 Cheers, Darkbasic --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Version: 1.0.18 Am Mittwoch, den 23.09.2009, 14:12 +0200 schrieb Niccolò Belli: > Package: debootstrap > Severity: grave > > Debian businesscard 20090923-1 i386, Virtualbox 3.0.6 > > See also bug #547780 > This should be fixed with tomorrows daily: debootstrap (1.0.18) unstable; urgency=low * Only use dpkg from the chroot, as there is no guarantee dpkg is available outside of the chroot (d-i installation for example). -- Aurelien Jarno Wed, 23 Sep 2009 11:37:01 +0200 -- Felix Zielcke Proud Debian Maintainer --- End Message ---
Re: Release preparation: errata file
Am Dienstag, den 22.09.2009, 18:37 +0200 schrieb Christian Perrier: > As part of the preparation of an alpha release (see minutes of > yesterday's meeting), I stepped up to work on the errata file. > > As usual, I started from the last errata file (the Lenny RC1 > version...which is indeed the errata file for the Lenny installer). > > Please find below the current status of this file. > > What do you folks think is worth being mentioned there (probably a lot > of things: I feel like we have many failure cases due to the low > testing threshold and the fact that many issues are obviously not > addressed)? > > As I just told on IRC, Theodore Ts'o replied to my mail about mkfs.ext4 His `master' branch doestn't support 64bit ext4 yet only his `pu'. So ext4 > 16 TiB (or 32TiB? not sure, I should have asked) isn't supported yet. I try to test Colin's patch for GRUB 2 now, so maybe at least that supports it before mkfs.ext4 is ready for it. -- Felix Zielcke Proud Debian Maintainer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
partman-efi 20 MIGRATED to testing
FYI: The status of the partman-efi source package in Debian's testing distribution has changed. Previous version: 19 Current version: 20 -- This email is automatically generated once a day. As the installation of new packages into testing happens multiple times a day you will receive later changes on the next day. See http://release.debian.org/testing-watch/ for more information. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Release preparation: errata file
Quoting Felix Zielcke (fziel...@z-51.de): > Am Dienstag, den 22.09.2009, 18:37 +0200 schrieb Christian Perrier: > > As part of the preparation of an alpha release (see minutes of > > yesterday's meeting), I stepped up to work on the errata file. > > > > As usual, I started from the last errata file (the Lenny RC1 > > version...which is indeed the errata file for the Lenny installer). > > > > Please find below the current status of this file. > > > > What do you folks think is worth being mentioned there (probably a lot > > of things: I feel like we have many failure cases due to the low > > testing threshold and the fact that many issues are obviously not > > addressed)? > > > > > > As I just told on IRC, Theodore Ts'o replied to my mail about mkfs.ext4 > His `master' branch doestn't support 64bit ext4 yet only his `pu'. > So ext4 > 16 TiB (or 32TiB? not sure, I should have asked) isn't > supported yet. > I try to test Colin's patch for GRUB 2 now, so maybe at least that > supports it before mkfs.ext4 is ready for it. Partitions overs 16IiB not supported by ext4 The ext4 file system creation tools do not support creating file systems over 16TiB in size. Would that fit? signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#548101: /etc/init.d/console-setup: please add kbd to Should-Start
Package: console-setup Severity: normal Tags: patch User: pkg-kbd-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org Usertags: kbd-init-rdeps Hi! To handle #542225, the init script from the kbd package (an alternative to the currently standard console-tools package, planned to become the new default in the mid-term future) had to change its LSB “Provides:” word from “console-screen” to “kbd”. /etc/init.d/console-setup currently only has a “Should-Start:” on the former name, which is now exclusive to console-tools. To make sure your script is still run after /etc/init.d/kbd, insserv’s non-standardised “X-Start-Before:” header is used. This should be a temporary solution. Please consider applying the attached patch. It adds the “kbd” word to the requirements of your init script, so the list of reverse dependencies in /etc/init.d/kbd can be eventually removed again. Cheers, -- Michael Schutte diff -Naur console-setup-1.45~/debian/console-setup.console-setup.init console-setup-1.45/debian/console-setup.console-setup.init --- console-setup-1.45~/debian/console-setup.console-setup.init 2009-09-23 20:54:12.0 +0200 +++ console-setup-1.45/debian/console-setup.console-setup.init 2009-09-23 20:54:40.0 +0200 @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ # Provides: console-setup # Required-Start:$remote_fs # Required-Stop: -# Should-Start: console-screen +# Should-Start: console-screen kbd # Default-Start: S # Default-Stop: # X-Interactive: true signature.asc Description: Digital signature
