Re: linux-image-2.6-17-mac tries

2006-09-19 Thread Meelis Roos
I tried current 2.6.17-2-mac (2.6.17-9) on a Quadra 840AV. Mostly no news - it seems to work with the same problems as before (no RTC, no serial). Even keyboard worked fine for simple login session. I tried with no initrd at all, althoygh one was made on linux-image package install. I also got a

Re: linux-image-2.6-17-mac tries

2006-09-19 Thread Brad Boyer
On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 01:22:45PM +0200, Michael Schmitz wrote: > > It will kill the performance, but it looks like the driver has an > > option to disable pdma. Try adding this to the kernel command line: > > > > mac5380=-1,-1,-1,-1,0 > > > > Just get ready to wait for anything that touches scsi.

Re: m68k not a release arch for etch; status in testing, future plans?

2006-09-19 Thread Martin Schulze
Wouter Verhelst wrote: > I think the best way forward at this point in time is to create our own > release, as you suggest, very much like what amd64 did for sarge. On the > August 16 birthday party in Breda, I discussed this with Jeroen Van > Wolffelaar who told me that in theory, it should not be

Re: m68k not a release arch for etch; status in testing, future plans?

2006-09-19 Thread Stephen R Marenka
On Tue, Sep 19, 2006 at 09:43:54AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > Stephen R Marenka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I'm not saying quantity isn't a problem or that politics isn't annoying, > > but the m68k port's biggest problem since gcc-4.0 rolled out has been > > the toolchain. > > I

Re: m68k not a release arch for etch; status in testing, future plans?

2006-09-19 Thread Thomas Bushnell BSG
Stephen R Marenka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I'm not saying quantity isn't a problem or that politics isn't annoying, > but the m68k port's biggest problem since gcc-4.0 rolled out has been > the toolchain. I don't think this is the only thing, however. Notice that guile-1.6 has not built

Re: m68k not a release arch for etch; status in testing, future plans?

2006-09-19 Thread Andreas Barth
* Andreas Barth ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060919 15:23]: > * Stephen R Marenka ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060919 15:20]: > > I'd still like a stable, security-supported, m68k port. It doesn't need > > all of kde or gnome or openoffice. I don't know that anyone will ever try > > to run gnucash or gnuradio o

Re: m68k not a release arch for etch; status in testing, future plans?

2006-09-19 Thread Andreas Barth
* Stephen R Marenka ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060919 15:20]: > I think we do need to have a discussion about ports that don't build the > full archive, but otherwise can make a stable release and get security > support. Agreed. > I'd still like a stable, security-supported, m68k port. It doesn't ne

Re: [buildd] buildd's running 2.2.x?

2006-09-19 Thread Stephen R Marenka
On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 08:35:24PM +0200, Christian T. Steigies wrote: > On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 06:04:28PM +0200, Michael Schmitz wrote: > > > > Should I give 2.6 a try regardless of backlog state? > > > > > > Given we're out of the race for release, screw the backlog. I'll give 2.6 > > > a try on

Re: m68k not a release arch for etch; status in testing, future plans?

2006-09-19 Thread Stephen R Marenka
On Tue, Sep 19, 2006 at 04:42:16AM -0700, Brian Morris wrote: > my impression of the current situation is that there > is some fairly heavy politicking goings on here. one > the action is not consistent with debian's published > values of inclusiveness. > also to give people the freedom to parti

Re: [buildd] kde dep-waits

2006-09-19 Thread Stephen R Marenka
On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 07:53:11PM +0200, Ingo Juergensmann wrote: > On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 06:34:35PM +0200, Roman Zippel wrote: > > > > All the kde dep-wait failures need > > > dep-wait libgl1-mesa-dev (>= 6.5.0.cvs.20060524-1.1) > > Hmm, the log says only "Terminated". Could you check kernel m

Re: m68k not a release arch for etch; status in testing, future plans?

2006-09-19 Thread Wouter Verhelst
Hi Steve, On Sun, Sep 17, 2006 at 11:55:02PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: [...] > So with three months remaining until the scheduled release of etch, the > release team does not believe it's possible for m68k to close the gap on > these issues. > > As a result, the bts is already ignoring m68k in

Re: m68k not a release arch for etch; status in testing, future plans?

2006-09-19 Thread Brian Morris
i have not been using debian/linux for very long (less than a year), however i was involved with unix and with several kinds of 68k based machines when they were new. my impression of the current situation is that there is some fairly heavy politicking goings on here. one the action is not consis

Re: [D-I] mass kernel udeb update and preparations for RC1

2006-09-19 Thread Sven Luther
On Sun, Sep 17, 2006 at 02:28:06PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote: > * powerpc: oldworld boot problems with recent kernels Both will be fixed in 2.6.18, and are already in the 2.6.18-rc7 snapshots since today. We don't have 2.6.18 based d-i to confirm this, but i will do a custom build over the week to c

Re: Bug#387922: m68k syscalls for xserver-xorg-input-evdev

2006-09-19 Thread Geert Uytterhoeven
On Tue, 19 Sep 2006, Drew Parsons wrote: > On Mon, 2006-09-18 at 16:49 +0200, Frans Pop wrote: > > On Monday 18 September 2006 14:48, Drew Parsons wrote: > > > Could you tell me what the m68k flag is defined as, in the #if > > > defined( ) sense as in > > > > Surprise, surprise. It is (taken from