cdrom-detect_1.54_i386.changes uploaded successfully to ftp-master.debian.org
along with the files:
cdrom-detect_1.54.dsc
cdrom-detect_1.54.tar.xz
cdrom-detect_1.54_all.udeb
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon (running on host coccia.debian.org)
Accepted:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2015 08:49:38 +0200
Source: cdrom-detect
Binary: cdrom-detect
Architecture: source all
Version: 1.54
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian Install System Team
Changed-By: Christian Perri
cdrom-detect_1.54_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
cdrom-detect_1.54.dsc
cdrom-detect_1.54.tar.xz
cdrom-detect_1.54_all.udeb
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon (running on host franck.debian.org)
Your message dated Sun, 16 Aug 2015 12:21:51 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#795625: fixed in oldsys-preseed 3.19
has caused the Debian Bug report #795625,
regarding oldsys-preseed: FTBFS under some locales (eg.
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been
Hi,
Jorge Ernesto Guevara Cuenca (2015-08-15):
> I builded an image of debian cd with simple cdd that contain pacakges that
> i need to install after the base system is installed.
>
> I want install this packages with a script in the post-base-installer.d
> hook directory but i don't know how c
oldsys-preseed_3.19_source.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
oldsys-preseed_3.19.dsc
oldsys-preseed_3.19.tar.xz
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon (running on host franck.debian.org)
Accepted:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2015 14:11:07 +0200
Source: oldsys-preseed
Binary: oldsys-preseed
Architecture: source
Version: 3.19
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian Install System Team
Changed-By: Cyril Brulebois
Processing control commands:
> tags 784045 + patch
Bug #784045 [debian-installer-launcher] debian-installer-launcher needs to
depend on sudo
Added tag(s) patch.
> tags 784045 + pending
Bug #784045 [debian-installer-launcher] debian-installer-launcher needs to
depend on sudo
Added tag(s) pending.
Control: tags 784045 + patch
Control: tags 784045 + pending
Dear maintainer,
I've prepared an NMU for debian-installer-launcher (versioned as 21+nmu1) and
uploaded it to DELAYED/2. Please feel free to tell me if I
should delay it longer.
Thanks,
Iain.
--
e: i...@fsfe.orgw: iain.lea
debian-installer-launcher_21+nmu1_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to
localhost
along with the files:
debian-installer-launcher_21+nmu1.dsc
debian-installer-launcher_21+nmu1.tar.xz
debian-installer-launcher_21+nmu1_all.deb
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon (running on host fra
sorry, for digging out that old thread, but i never got an answer to
this one.
I think you are at debconf - maybe we could meet there?
Jens Thiele writes:
> Karsten Merker writes:
>
>> Ah, so the configuration happens via specific build-time config
>> options and not via the u-boot environment
Package: partman-crypto
Severity: wishlist
Tags: d-i
Could we enable encryption of swap by default, even when full disk
encryption is not used? As far as I undrestand, there is no
performance issue for this for most hardware made in the past
half-decade. Swap encryption also doesn't require the us
Hi,
Iain R. Learmonth (2015-08-16):
> Control: tags 784045 + patch
> Control: tags 784045 + pending
>
> Dear maintainer,
>
> I've prepared an NMU for debian-installer-launcher (versioned as 21+nmu1)
> and uploaded it to DELAYED/2. Please feel free to tell me if I should delay
> it longer.
Than
Hi Lars,
Lars Wirzenius (2015-08-16):
> Package: partman-crypto
> Severity: wishlist
> Tags: d-i
>
> Could we enable encryption of swap by default, even when full disk
> encryption is not used? As far as I undrestand, there is no
> performance issue for this for most hardware made in the past
>
On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 03:55:24PM +0200, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> Could we enable encryption of swap by default, even when full disk
> encryption is not used? As far as I undrestand, there is no
> performance issue for this for most hardware made in the past
> half-decade.
This is obviously wrong.
/debian-installer-launcher_21+nmu1_amd64.changes is already present on target
host:
2-day/debian-installer-launcher_21+nmu1_all.deb
Either you already uploaded it, or someone else came first.
Job debian-installer-launcher_21+nmu1_amd64.changes removed.
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon
Your message dated Sun, 16 Aug 2015 15:20:30 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#784045: fixed in debian-installer-launcher 21+nmu1
has caused the Debian Bug report #784045,
regarding debian-installer-launcher needs to depend on sudo
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the
Accepted:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2015 14:20:28 +0100
Source: debian-installer-launcher
Binary: debian-installer-launcher
Architecture: source all
Version: 21+nmu1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian Install System Team
Cyril Brulebois (2015-08-16):
> Iain R. Learmonth (2015-08-16):
> > Control: tags 784045 + patch
> > Control: tags 784045 + pending
> >
> > Dear maintainer,
> >
> > I've prepared an NMU for debian-installer-launcher (versioned as 21+nmu1)
> > and uploaded it to DELAYED/2. Please feel free to te
0.00] ACPI BIOS Warning (bug): 32/64X length mismatch in
FADT/Pm1aControlBlock: 16/32 (20140424/tbfadt-618)
[ 0.00] ACPI BIOS Warning (bug): 32/64X length mismatch in
FADT/Pm2ControlBlock: 8/32 (20140424/tbfadt-618)
[ 0.00] ACPI BIOS Warning (bug): 32/64X length mismatch in
FADT/
20 matches
Mail list logo
