Re: b-f 3.0.23 powerpc-apus lot of joy but still some issues

2002-05-28 Thread Andreas Wüst
Hi Chris > On Mon, May 27, 2002 at 11:22:46PM +0200, Andreas W?st wrote: >> Hi Eduard Should I just substitute every "stable" by "testing"? Or do I have to await final release, and it's just a bad point in time to now install woody? >>> >>> Better substitute with "woody" for the n

Re: b-f 3.0.23 powerpc-apus lot of joy but still some issues

2002-05-27 Thread Chris Tillman
On Mon, May 27, 2002 at 11:22:46PM +0200, Andreas W?st wrote: > Hi Eduard > >> Should I just substitute every "stable" by "testing"? Or do I have to > >> await final release, and it's just a bad point in time to now install > >> woody? > > > > Better substitute with "woody" for the next time. >

Re: b-f 3.0.23 powerpc-apus lot of joy but still some issues

2002-05-27 Thread Andreas Wüst
Hi Eduard Thank you very much for your speedy answer!! > #include > Andreas Wüst wrote on Mon May 27, 2002 um 07:29:21PM: > >> be now, woody got finally freezed, and everything is pointing to >> stable. So after the base installation, tasksel obviously gets its >> packages from the potato dire

Re: b-f 3.0.23 powerpc-apus lot of joy but still some issues

2002-05-27 Thread Eduard Bloch
#include Andreas Wüst wrote on Mon May 27, 2002 um 07:29:21PM: > be now, woody got finally freezed, and everything is pointing to > stable. So after the base installation, tasksel obviously gets its > packages from the potato directories and doesn't succeed to configure > it all correctly. Is th

b-f 3.0.23 powerpc-apus lot of joy but still some issues

2002-05-27 Thread Andreas Wüst
Hi Yes, I am back to the game and just tried the latest b-f 3.0.23 from dists/woody/main/disks-powerpc/current/apus/. The first part worked flawlessly out-of-the-box, apart from some typos in english and german translations, but I think I could send in a diff when I finally managed to install

Re: b-f 3.0.23

2002-05-21 Thread Stefan Gybas
On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 12:51:07AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > It'd be better if all architectures could sync on 3.0.23 reasonably > quickly, but any that don't will just stick with 3.0.22. I have just uploaded b-f 3.0.23 for s390 so all 11 architectures are in sync now.

Re: coordinating b-f 3.0.23 release

2002-05-15 Thread David Kimdon
Wed, May 15, 2002 at 12:23:59PM -0400 wrote: > > If so, lets all show up on #debian-boot. I'd prefer to David to build > the i386 (and maybe source). Anyhow, I'm around and I can tag, build > source pkgs, and build the powerpc version I'm building i386 binary now. -David -- To UNSUBSCR

Re: coordinating b-f 3.0.23 release

2002-05-15 Thread Richard Hirst
On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 12:01:22PM -0500, Christian T. Steigies wrote: > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 12:23:59PM -0400, Adam Di Carlo wrote: > > > > For coordinating, can we agree to perhaps tag and start it building > > tonight? I don't see anything blocking 3.0.23 release. > > Do we now have an op

Re: testing b-f 3.0.23

2002-05-15 Thread Nancy Davis
> We are going to release 3.0.23 boot-floppies soon. Some archs will > likely use this version for woody, depending on a variety of factors. > > A test i386 set is available here: > http://people.debian.org/~dwhedon/dists/woody/main/disks-i386/current/ > > changes here: > http://people.debian.o

Re: b-f 3.0.23

2002-05-14 Thread Michael Stone
On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:41:55PM +0200, Pierre Machard wrote: > if you video card is not recognise by X. For example on my laptop, > the default option in slack make my screen wider. With framebuffer it > feets on the whole screen, not only in a little rectangular area. With my laptop it makes

Re: b-f 3.0.23

2002-05-14 Thread Pierre Machard
On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 01:15:35PM +0100, Richard Hirst wrote: [...] > I'm not aware of anything. Maybe some framebuffers have boot time > options to disable them, but I don't think boot-floppies has any such > option. Just a little comment on framebuffer. I have recently tested a slackware and

Re: b-f 3.0.23

2002-05-14 Thread Richard Hirst
On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 03:47:38PM +0100, Philip Blundell wrote: > On Tue, 2002-05-14 at 13:58, Junichi Uekawa wrote: > > On Tue, 14 May 2002 13:15:35 +0100 > > Richard Hirst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I'm not aware of anything. Maybe some framebuffers have boot time > > > options to disabl

Re: b-f 3.0.23

2002-05-14 Thread Junichi Uekawa
On Tue, 14 May 2002 13:15:35 +0100 Richard Hirst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm not aware of anything. Maybe some framebuffers have boot time > options to disable them, but I don't think boot-floppies has any such > option. > > Can I suggest something like the patch below, which would let us b

Re: b-f 3.0.23

2002-05-14 Thread Richard Hirst
On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 09:31:13AM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote: > "Christian T. Steigies" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> immo vero scripsit: > > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 12:51:07AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > > > Hi guys, > > > > > > If you'd like to tag and upload 3.0.23 sometime this week, that will >

testing b-f 3.0.23

2002-05-13 Thread David Kimdon
Hi all, We are going to release 3.0.23 boot-floppies soon. Some archs will likely use this version for woody, depending on a variety of factors. A test i386 set is available here: http://people.debian.org/~dwhedon/dists/woody/main/disks-i386/current/ changes here: http://people.debian.org/~dwh

Re: b-f 3.0.23

2002-05-13 Thread Junichi Uekawa
"Christian T. Steigies" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> immo vero scripsit: > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 12:51:07AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > > Hi guys, > > > > If you'd like to tag and upload 3.0.23 sometime this week, that will > > be fine. I believe there are some sparc updates desirect so we can have >

b-f 3.0.23

2002-05-13 Thread Anthony Towns
Hi guys, If you'd like to tag and upload 3.0.23 sometime this week, that will be fine. I believe there are some sparc updates desirect so we can have bootable sparc CDs, that Ben will know about. Please follow Adam's lead, and don't do anything to break them. It'd be better if all architectures c