On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 06:11:24PM +, Holger Levsen wrote:
>On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 04:01:10PM -0400, Nicholas D Steeves wrote:
>> I still wonder if a fork of the last linux:src=4.4, updated to bring
>> it to linux-4.4.14 would be a lower support burden? I'm still finding
>> that there are a f
On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 04:15:36PM -0300, Breno Leitao wrote:
>Steve,
>
>On 07/04/2016 10:01 AM, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>>A lot of arm64 machine users would benefit from this, and maybe owners
>>of very recent amd64 machines too.
>
>ppc64el port would take benefit from it also, since, there were man
On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 02:37:06PM +0200, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
>Hi Steve,
>
>On Mon Jul 04, 2016 at 14:01:03 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>> A lot of arm64 machine users would benefit from this, and maybe owners
>> of very recent amd64 machines too, with better support for things on
>> the Sk
On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 07:05:42PM +0200, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>On Mon, 2016-07-04 at 14:01 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>> Hey folks,
>>
>> There's something I've been pondering for a while, along with some
>> other folks - it might be useful to do a "jessie and a half" release,
>> similarly to w
Steve,
On 07/04/2016 10:01 AM, Steve McIntyre wrote:
A lot of arm64 machine users would benefit from this, and maybe owners
of very recent amd64 machines too.
ppc64el port would take benefit from it also, since, there were many new
kernel features that made linux after 3.16.
Holger Levsen (2016-07-05):
> On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 04:01:10PM -0400, Nicholas D Steeves wrote:
> > I still wonder if a fork of the last linux:src=4.4, updated to bring
> > it to linux-4.4.14 would be a lower support burden? I'm still finding
> > that there are a fair number of issues reported
On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 04:01:10PM -0400, Nicholas D Steeves wrote:
> I still wonder if a fork of the last linux:src=4.4, updated to bring
> it to linux-4.4.14 would be a lower support burden? I'm still finding
> that there are a fair number of issues reported with 4.5.x and 4.6.x
> on various mai
On Tue, 2016-07-05 at 08:25 +0100, Rebecca N. Palmer wrote:
> Would it be possible/reasonable (at least for stretch) to have the
> installer detect this and ask "your hardware appears to be too new for
> this release, would you like to enable -backports?"
It might be, but it's going to be hard t
Package: advancecomp
Version: 1.20-1
Severity: normal
Hi. (I'm CC'ing the arm list, in case others have seen this problem).
I am using an armel system (some details you can see below) and I'm having
problems recompressing gzipped files with advdef.
In particular, advdef works perfectly when I us
2016-07-05 7:43 GMT-03:00 Jose R R :
> > Why would you call it "Jessie + 1/2"? Wouldn't it be a better idea
> Well IBM set a precedent for that: OS/2.
> Accordingly, Jessie BP could be called Jessie/2 ;-)
Well, that would be a half Jessie, not Jessie and a half, right? We could
use 3Jessie/2 o
Hi Steve,
On Mon Jul 04, 2016 at 14:01:03 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> A lot of arm64 machine users would benefit from this, and maybe owners
> of very recent amd64 machines too, with better support for things on
> the Skylake platform. Those are the only two architectures I'm
> thinking of sup
On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 2:01 AM, Christian Seiler wrote:
>
> On 07/04/2016 03:01 PM, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> > There's something I've been pondering for a while, along with some
> > other folks - it might be useful to do a "jessie and a half" release,
> > similarly to what we did in the etch days.
On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 10:52:37AM +0200, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-07-05 at 10:07 +0200, Mark Brown wrote:
> > We're getting to the point where there's a fairly pressing need for
> > arm64 - the more useful hardware is starting to get a wider distribution
> > and we don't really have an
On 07/04/2016 03:01 PM, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> There's something I've been pondering for a while, along with some
> other folks - it might be useful to do a "jessie and a half" release,
> similarly to what we did in the etch days. That's *basically* just
> like a normal jessie release, but with a
On Tue, 2016-07-05 at 10:07 +0200, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 07:05:42PM +0200, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Mon, 2016-07-04 at 14:01 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>
> > > A lot of arm64 machine users would benefit from this, and maybe owners
> > > of very recent amd64 machines too,
On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 04:01:10PM -0400, Nicholas D Steeves wrote:
>>>
>>> Is anybody else interested in helping? Thoughts/comments?
>
>Yes, it's a project I'm already working on ;-) Is this project a
>candidate for a new Debian Team?
I guess so, yes. :-)
>> 2. Does it have to be called "jessi
On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 07:05:42PM +0200, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-07-04 at 14:01 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> > A lot of arm64 machine users would benefit from this, and maybe owners
> > of very recent amd64 machines too, with better support for things on
> > the Skylake platform. Th
On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 03:12:34PM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Steve McIntyre (2016-07-04):
>> There's something I've been pondering for a while, along with some
>> other folks - it might be useful to do a "jessie and a half" release,
>> similarly to what we did in the etch days. That's
On Tue, 2016-07-05 at 08:25 +0100, Rebecca N. Palmer wrote:
> Have you reported this bug (with the full warnings)? If not, please
> do so.
I haven't. If I got a response at all to "My monitor doesn't work" it
looks to me it would be: compile latest source with instrumentation
turned on and send
Would it be possible/reasonable (at least for stretch) to have the
installer detect this and ask "your hardware appears to be too new for
this release, would you like to enable -backports?"
On 04/07/16 23:38, Ben Hutchings wrote:
As I understand it, xserver-xorg-video-modesetting should be use
20 matches
Mail list logo
