Bug#676372: marked as done (API breakage)

Your message dated Thu, 14 Jun 2012 08:55:08 +0200 with message-id <20120614065508.ga18...@wavehammer.waldi.eu.org> and subject line Re: Bug#676372: API breakage has caused the Debian Bug report #676372, regarding API breakage to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has be

powerpc with GPT and MD?

I want to install 6.0.5 on a powerpc platform that has a SoC-specific kernel. The platform I'm working on already has disks set up with GPTs and partitions mirrored with MD (no LVM involved; in fact it is not configured into the kernel). I copied the necessary kernel and modules to a partition,

flash-kernel_3.0~rc.5_armel.changes ACCEPTED into unstable

Accepted: flash-kernel-installer_3.0~rc.5_armel.udeb to main/f/flash-kernel/flash-kernel-installer_3.0~rc.5_armel.udeb flash-kernel_3.0~rc.5.dsc to main/f/flash-kernel/flash-kernel_3.0~rc.5.dsc flash-kernel_3.0~rc.5.tar.gz to main/f/flash-kernel/flash-kernel_3.0~rc.5.tar.gz flash-kernel_3.

Processing of flash-kernel_3.0~rc.5_armel.changes

flash-kernel_3.0~rc.5_armel.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: flash-kernel_3.0~rc.5.dsc flash-kernel_3.0~rc.5.tar.gz flash-kernel_3.0~rc.5_armel.deb flash-kernel-installer_3.0~rc.5_armel.udeb Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon (running on host franc

Bug#670938: marked as done (flash-kernel: support is missing for LaCie Kirkwood NASes)

Your message dated Wed, 13 Jun 2012 23:48:56 + with message-id and subject line Bug#670938: fixed in flash-kernel 3.0~rc.5 has caused the Debian Bug report #670938, regarding flash-kernel: support is missing for LaCie Kirkwood NASes to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the pro

Re: Debian & the FSF Secure Boot petition

On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 11:17:25AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > Dear d-i hackers, I've been contacted by Paul Wise about FSF campaign on > "secure boot" [1] (thanks Paul!). As observed by various commenters over > the net, it is indeed striking that no FOSS distros is in there. I plan > to co

Re: Mount options for procfs

Ben Hutchings wrote: > Since linux version 3.2.20-1, it is possible to set a 'hidepid' mount > option on procfs, which restricts the visibility of unprivileged users > to see other users' processes. > > initscripts correctly applies this option if present in /etc/fstab. > > Should d-i allow procf

tasksel upload

Hi Is there anything that speaks against an upload of tasksel? It works fine in my tests. Okay, #676777 in debhelper needs to be fixed also. Bastian -- No one wants war. -- Kirk, "Errand of Mercy", stardate 3201.7 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.

Mount options for procfs

Since linux version 3.2.20-1, it is possible to set a 'hidepid' mount option on procfs, which restricts the visibility of unprivileged users to see other users' processes. initscripts correctly applies this option if present in /etc/fstab. Should d-i allow procfs mount opions to be configured at

Bug#675866: marked as done (installation-reports: Gnome 3 launches in fallback mode after install)

Your message dated Wed, 13 Jun 2012 11:04:39 +0100 with message-id <4fd865b7.4070...@debianpt.org> and subject line Re: Bug#675866: installation-reports: Gnome 3 launches in fallback mode after install has caused the Debian Bug report #675866, regarding installation-reports: Gnome 3 launches in fa