> Ben has expressed his frustration with the limited size on some Orion
> devices several times in the past. Given how old these devices are
> now (plus the fact that we never had a lot of Linkstation users), I
> think it doesn't make sense to add support for these devices now (or
> in the case of
Hi,
I having trouble making a preseed for multiple drives. We have some
hardware raid with multiple volumes and different storage mediums.
For some reason the SSDs Volume that are meant to storage of a database
are the only ones that allow the server to boot.
So we want to install a bunch o
* Roger Shimizu [2015-10-28 00:20]:
> - Is the size of d-i kernel smaller than common linux-image kernel? If
> so, there's still chance for d-i.
As Ben pointed out, it's the same kernel.
Ben has expressed his frustration with the limited size on some Orion
devices several times in the past. Giv
Ihr E-Mail Postfach ist fast voll.
Lieber Kunde [debian-boot@lists.debian.org],
Der Speicherplatz fur Ihre E-Mails in Ihrem E-Mail Postfach ist voll.
Bitte beachten Sie: Ihr Speicherplatz komplett belegt
Ihr E-Mail Postfach ist fast voll.
Lieber Kunde [debian-boot@lists.debian.org],
Der Speicherplatz fur Ihre E-Mails in Ihrem E-Mail Postfach ist voll.
Bitte beachten Sie: Ihr Speicherplatz komplett belegt
Accepted:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2015 14:03:53 +0100
Source: netcfg
Binary: netcfg netcfg-static
Architecture: source i386
Version: 1.135
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian Install System Team
Changed-By: Christian P
Your message dated Tue, 03 Nov 2015 15:44:25 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#798373: fixed in netcfg 1.135
has caused the Debian Bug report #798373,
regarding netcfg: Change default wireless networking type from WEP to WPA
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the proble
Your message dated Tue, 03 Nov 2015 15:44:25 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#591012: fixed in netcfg 1.135
has caused the Debian Bug report #591012,
regarding netcfg: Support /sys/class/net/ethX/carrier for link detection?
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the proble
netcfg_1.135_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
netcfg_1.135.dsc
netcfg_1.135.tar.xz
netcfg-static_1.135_i386.udeb
netcfg_1.135_i386.udeb
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon (running on host franck.debian.org)
netcfg_1.135_i386.changes uploaded successfully to ftp-master.debian.org
along with the files:
netcfg_1.135.dsc
netcfg_1.135.tar.xz
netcfg-static_1.135_i386.udeb
netcfg_1.135_i386.udeb
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon (running on host coccia.debian.org)
Accepted:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2015 07:09:23 +0100
Source: debootstrap
Binary: debootstrap debootstrap-udeb
Architecture: source all
Version: 1.0.74
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian Install System Team
Changed-By
debootstrap_1.0.74_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
debootstrap_1.0.74.dsc
debootstrap_1.0.74.tar.gz
debootstrap-udeb_1.0.74_all.udeb
debootstrap_1.0.74_all.deb
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon (running on host franck.debian.org)
debootstrap_1.0.74_i386.changes uploaded successfully to ftp-master.debian.org
along with the files:
debootstrap_1.0.74.dsc
debootstrap_1.0.74.tar.gz
debootstrap-udeb_1.0.74_all.udeb
debootstrap_1.0.74_all.deb
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon (running on host coccia.debian.org)
On 10 October 2015 at 09:54, Felipe Sateler wrote:
> Control: tags -1 patch
>
> Missed the bug cc, sorry for the duplicate.
>
> On 1 September 2015 at 17:54, Michael Biebl wrote:
>> Am 01.09.2015 um 19:38 schrieb Felipe Sateler:
>>> On 1 September 2015 at 14:05, Anton Zinoviev wrote:
On Thu
binary:debootstrap is NEW.
binary:debootstrap-udeb is NEW.
source:debootstrap is NEW.
Your package has been put into the NEW queue, which requires manual action
from the ftpteam to process. The upload was otherwise valid (it had a good
OpenPGP signature and file hashes are valid), so please be pat
debootstrap_1.0.73~bpo8+1_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
debootstrap_1.0.73~bpo8+1.dsc
debootstrap_1.0.73~bpo8+1.tar.gz
debootstrap_1.0.73~bpo8+1_all.deb
debootstrap-udeb_1.0.73~bpo8+1_all.udeb
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon (running on
Source-only uploads to NEW are not allowed.
===
Please feel free to respond to this email if you don't understand why
your files were rejected, or if you upload new files which address our
concerns.
debootstrap_1.0.73~bpo8+1_source.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
debootstrap_1.0.73~bpo8+1.dsc
debootstrap_1.0.73~bpo8+1.tar.gz
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon (running on host franck.debian.org)
Ian Campbell (2015-11-03):
> Such as adjustments to be made to build in the older suite that's never
> happened to me (just lucky I expect). In that case keeping some sort of
> branch around does seem useful.
Exactly; from my limited bpo experience, disabling multi-arch was a
usual usecase, but t
On Tue, 2015-11-03 at 09:56 +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Ian Campbell (2015-11-03):
> > For flash-kernel (and other bpo things I do outside of d-i) I generally
> > push the tag but not the branch.
> >
> > This is because each bpo upload is essentially a little stub branch
> > rooted at the bas
Ian Campbell (2015-11-03):
> For flash-kernel (and other bpo things I do outside of d-i) I generally
> push the tag but not the branch.
>
> This is because each bpo upload is essentially a little stub branch
> rooted at the base release and they do not (at least how I do things)
> form a coherent
On Tue, 2015-11-03 at 00:46 +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> You're receiving this mail because you're on debian-boot@ or you've got
> something ACCEPTED into a backports suite; relevant packages seem to be
> the following ones: debootstrap, di-netboot-assistant, and flash-kernel.
>
22 matches
Mail list logo
