On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 12:25:34PM +0100, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
> maximilian attems wrote:
> > we are about to stabilize 2.6.17, although we won't backport 2.6.18
> > stuff, as from the timing 2.6.18 looks good. 2.6.18 has features for
> > several archs ppc, amd64 (smp alternatives), sparc (sbus sys
maximilian attems wrote:
[snip]
> > No, it is not. As you may have noticed, we had a release update a few
> > days ago, telling people that we're currently planning to release with
> > 2.6.17. Though we're aware that it might be needed to update the kernel
> > in October, the current upstream relea
On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 12:06:50PM +0200, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> maximilian attems <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 01:14:55PM -0700, Jason Self wrote:
> >> On 7/27/06, Thiemo Seufer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> Backporting the necessary changes is certainly an o
maximilian attems <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 01:14:55PM -0700, Jason Self wrote:
>> On 7/27/06, Thiemo Seufer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Backporting the necessary changes is certainly an option. I would
>>> think this is up to the powerpc Porters to handle.
>> Thank y
On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 01:14:55PM -0700, Jason Self wrote:
> On 7/27/06, Thiemo Seufer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Backporting the necessary changes is certainly an option. I would
> >think this is up to the powerpc Porters to handle.
>
> Thank you. I'll continue to pursue this on debian-powerp
On 7/27/06, maximilian attems <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
2.6.18 is considered as release kernel, so please don't draw to quick
conclusions.
I'll be happy if 2.6.18 makes it in but ultimately I don't suppose it
matters whether it's 2.6.18 proper, or 2.6.17 with the changes
backported, as long a
On 7/27/06, Thiemo Seufer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Backporting the necessary changes is certainly an option. I would
think this is up to the powerpc Porters to handle.
Thank you. I'll continue to pursue this on debian-powerpc.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of
"Jason Self" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It's important, IMHO, that 2.6.17 _not_ be selected as the default
> kernel but rather 2.6.18 (or later) for the reasons discussed on
> debian-powerpc... even if that means delaying the release of Etch.
Or backport the fixes to 2.6.17.
--
O T A
Jason Self wrote:
[snip]
> Please see
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-powerpc/2006/07/msg00188.html
>
> And, as Brian Durant pointed out, this isn't just about the iMac G5
> but also the Power Mac G5 (PowerMac 9.1) as well. In fact, Debian
> chokes on most of Apple's newer PowerPC machines. I and
-- Forwarded message --
From: Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Jul 24, 2006 6:43 AM
Subject: Upcoming Release of Debian GNU/Linux 4.0
...will ship with Linux 2.6.17 as itsdefault kernel. This kernel will
be used across all architectures and on the installer. A later versio
10 matches
Mail list logo
