On Sat, Nov 25, 2006 at 01:42:48PM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Sat, Nov 25, 2006 at 10:38:04AM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> >> Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>
> >> >> Neither of I or Frans said that it need to be done until toda
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, Nov 25, 2006 at 10:38:04AM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
>> Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> >> Neither of I or Frans said that it need to be done until today or
>> >> tomorrow. We just asked for the fix.
>> >>
>> >> You misunderstan
On Sat, Nov 25, 2006 at 10:38:04AM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> Neither of I or Frans said that it need to be done until today or
> >> tomorrow. We just asked for the fix.
> >>
> >> You misunderstand it as I was forcing you to fix it ASAP and it's
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Neither of I or Frans said that it need to be done until today or
>> tomorrow. We just asked for the fix.
>>
>> You misunderstand it as I was forcing you to fix it ASAP and it's not
>> true.
>
> Well, you sure where putting lot of pressure on me, and ind
On Fri, Nov 24, 2006 at 11:55:24AM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Fri, Nov 24, 2006 at 10:53:02AM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> >> Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>
> >> >> patch with same error and blame me? Sorry Sven but you're usi
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Nov 24, 2006 at 10:53:02AM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
>> Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> >> patch with same error and blame me? Sorry Sven but you're using every
>> >> oportunity to blame everyone.
>> >
>> > No, i don't blame you.
On Fri, Nov 24, 2006 at 10:53:02AM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> patch with same error and blame me? Sorry Sven but you're using every
> >> oportunity to blame everyone.
> >
> > No, i don't blame you. you seem eager for me to fix the problem, but ar
On Fri, Nov 24, 2006 at 10:49:40AM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Thu, Nov 23, 2006 at 09:37:04PM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> >> Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>
> >> > So, if you want to solve this, don't propose to commit my patc
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> patch with same error and blame me? Sorry Sven but you're using every
>> oportunity to blame everyone.
>
> No, i don't blame you. you seem eager for me to fix the problem, but are
> ignoring that i am not able to work on it until this WE.
You're suppose
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Nov 23, 2006 at 09:37:04PM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
>> Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > So, if you want to solve this, don't propose to commit my patch, but speak
>> > to
>> > frans, and beat some decency and maturity into him
On Thu, Nov 23, 2006 at 09:13:42PM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Thu, Nov 23, 2006 at 06:22:56PM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> >> Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>
> >> > Index: src/lib/debian-installer-startup.d/Makefile
> >> >
On Thu, Nov 23, 2006 at 09:37:04PM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > So, if you want to solve this, don't propose to commit my patch, but speak
> > to
> > frans, and beat some decency and maturity into him.
>
> How you can be sure if I hadn't done it?
Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The provided patch is broken: standard error is redirected to a file
> named "1" instead of file handle 1.
> Suggest to use the following syntax instead:
>modprobe -q || true
I did it myself after apply Sven patch, he had used modprobe only.
> Finall
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So, if you want to solve this, don't propose to commit my patch, but speak to
> frans, and beat some decency and maturity into him.
How you can be sure if I hadn't done it? I did it already too many
times.
The way you're dealing with others and now with
On Thu, Nov 23, 2006 at 09:07:44PM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> > I will, but i have no access to the box to test it until this WE. The
> >> > patch is
> >> > so trivial you can just as well fix it yourself. I attached the modified
> >> > version
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Nov 23, 2006 at 06:22:56PM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
>> Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > Index: src/lib/debian-installer-startup.d/Makefile
>> > ===
>> > --- src/li
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > I will, but i have no access to the box to test it until this WE. The
>> > patch is
>> > so trivial you can just as well fix it yourself. I attached the modified
>> > version of the patch with frans suggestion. The original proposal was
>> > coming
>>
On Thu, Nov 23, 2006 at 06:22:56PM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Index: src/lib/debian-installer-startup.d/Makefile
> > ===
> > --- src/lib/debian-installer-startup.d/Makefile (revis
On Thu, Nov 23, 2006 at 06:21:57PM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> Let's have a deal. When you don't receive a comment on a bug, please
> >> ping me. There're a lot of reason to it happen not only disagreements
> >> with you. There're a bunch of bugs
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Index: src/lib/debian-installer-startup.d/Makefile
> ===
> --- src/lib/debian-installer-startup.d/Makefile (revision 42042)
> +++ src/lib/debian-installer-startup.d/Makefile (worki
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Let's have a deal. When you don't receive a comment on a bug, please
>> ping me. There're a lot of reason to it happen not only disagreements
>> with you. There're a bunch of bugs to handle on d-i and sometimes
>> those bugs are forgotten. Just bring my a
On Thu, Nov 23, 2006 at 05:19:44PM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
>
> Even if the patch is simple? (I mean for inclusion on Debian patch queue).
Well, i have not looked into it. If the patch is scheduled for upstreamn
inclusion at a later point, and thus of upstream quality, then we can include
it
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > Well, this is not how things are, after investigation and discussion with
>> > Benjamin Herrenschmidt, the powerpc/powermac linux kernel maintainer. The
>> > current way of doing this is the best compromise for within the 2.6.18 and
>> > etch timeframe.
On Thu, Nov 23, 2006 at 02:29:25PM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> Also, I wonder if all listed modules really need to be modprobed
> >> individually: modprobe will after all load modules that other modules
> >> depend on automatically.
> >
> > Well
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Also, I wonder if all listed modules really need to be modprobed
>> individually: modprobe will after all load modules that other modules
>> depend on automatically.
>
> Well, this is not how things are, after investigation and discussion with
> Benjami
On Thu, Nov 23, 2006 at 01:51:59PM +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
> The provided patch is broken: standard error is redirected to a file
> named "1" instead of file handle 1.
> Suggest to use the following syntax instead:
>modprobe -q || true
Ok, will be done, i wonder why you didn't start by telli
The provided patch is broken: standard error is redirected to a file
named "1" instead of file handle 1.
Suggest to use the following syntax instead:
modprobe -q || true
Also, I wonder if all listed modules really need to be modprobed
individually: modprobe will after all load modules that o
27 matches
Mail list logo
