On Tue, Sep 28, 2004 at 07:58:36AM -0500, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 11:34:31PM -0700, Brad Boyer wrote:
>
> > Without a working SCSI or serial driver for my main mac68k test box,
> > it's tough to do much testing on 2.6. However, ADB seems to work fine.
>
> Whoa, adb is w
On Tue, Sep 28, 2004 at 07:58:36AM -0500, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 11:34:31PM -0700, Brad Boyer wrote:
>
> > Without a working SCSI or serial driver for my main mac68k test box,
> > it's tough to do much testing on 2.6. However, ADB seems to work fine.
>
> Whoa, adb is w
On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 11:34:31PM -0700, Brad Boyer wrote:
> Without a working SCSI or serial driver for my main mac68k test box,
> it's tough to do much testing on 2.6. However, ADB seems to work fine.
Whoa, adb is working? I guess I haven't been paying enough attention.
Cool.
--
Stephen R.
On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 09:51:40PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 20, 2004 at 10:11:34AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> Yes. Something similar should be done for m68k Macs. They need to use
> "macintosh_old", since 2.4 isn't available for that subarch. Debian 68k
> guys, is it reasona
On Sat, Sep 25, 2004 at 11:28:31PM -0700, Brad Boyer wrote:
> The only type of mouse on a 68k mac is ADB, and the entire ADB layer
> got converted over to use the generic input system for 2.4. The old
> adbmouse driver doesn't even exist in the tree in 2.6, but it was
> still possible to compile it
5 matches
Mail list logo
