Bug#794529: Sound goes to internal speaker and not lineout

Package: src:linux Version: 4.0.8-2 Severity: normal Since 4.0, even with sound configured to go on line out and not internal speaker of the PC, sound is emitted by the speakers (even with speakers muted and line out not muted). I use the Intel sound card not the radeon HDMI. -- Package-specifi

Bug#794520: linux-image-4.0.0-2-amd64: AMD A8-7100, no thermal information

Package: src:linux Version: 4.0.8-2 Severity: normal Dear Maintainer, using a Lenovo E555, acpi -t returns nothing. sensors-detect suggested k10temp Manually loading said module does not help (acpi -t stay null) nor does it complains in /var/log/messages Output of lscpu appended at the end of t

linux-latest_66_multi.changes is NEW

binary:linux-perf 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 patient. Packages are routinely processed through to the archi

Processing of linux-latest_66_multi.changes

linux-latest_66_multi.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: linux-latest_66.dsc linux-latest_66.tar.gz linux-doc_4.1+66_all.deb linux-perf_4.1+66_all.deb linux-source_4.1+66_all.deb linux-tools_4.1+66_all.deb Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon (runn

linux-tools_4.1.4-1_multi.changes is NEW

binary:linux-perf-4.1 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 patient. Packages are routinely processed through to the a

linux_4.1.3-1_multi.changes is NEW

binary:acpi-modules-4.1.0-1-586-di is NEW. binary:acpi-modules-4.1.0-1-686-pae-di is NEW. binary:acpi-modules-4.1.0-1-amd64-di is NEW. binary:affs-modules-4.1.0-1-4kc-malta-di is NEW. binary:affs-modules-4.1.0-1-loongson-2e-di is NEW. binary:affs-modules-4.1.0-1-loongson-2f-di is NEW. binary:affs-m

Processing of linux-tools_4.1.4-1_multi.changes

linux-tools_4.1.4-1_multi.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: linux-tools_4.1.4-1.dsc linux-tools_4.1.4.orig.tar.xz linux-tools_4.1.4-1.debian.tar.xz hyperv-daemons_4.1.4-1_i386.deb libusbip-dev_2.0+4.1.4-1_i386.deb linux-kbuild-4.1_4.1.4-1_i386.deb linux-

Processing of linux_4.1.3-1_multi.changes

linux_4.1.3-1_multi.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: linux_4.1.3-1.dsc linux_4.1.3.orig.tar.xz linux_4.1.3-1.debian.tar.xz linux-doc-4.1_4.1.3-1_all.deb linux-manual-4.1_4.1.3-1_all.deb linux-source-4.1_4.1.3-1_all.deb linux-support-4.1.0-1_4.1.3-1_all.

Bug#790536: FTBFS with GCC 5: comparison of constant '-1' with boolean expression is always false

Ben Hutchings (2015-08-03): > Thanks, but that fix was included in 4.1 and I'm about to upload 4.1 > packages to unstable at last. No cherry-picking is required. Yep, I've seen changes land for 4.1; no problem, just wanted to give it a try and make sure it wasn't a blocker. Mraw, KiBi. signat

Processed: closing 790536

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > close 790536 4.1.2-1~exp1 Bug #790536 [src:linux-tools] FTBFS with GCC 5: comparison of constant '-1' with boolean expression is always false Marked as fixed in versions linux-tools/4.1.2-1~exp1. Bug #790536 [src:linux-tools] FTBFS with GCC 5: co

Bug#790536: FTBFS with GCC 5: comparison of constant '-1' with boolean expression is always false

On Mon, 2015-08-03 at 20:22 +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > Control: reassign -1 src:linux-tools 4.0.2-1 > Control: tag -1 fixed-upstream patch > > Hi, > > Martin Michlmayr (2015-06-29): > > Package: linux-tools > > Version: 4.0.2-1 > > Severity: important > > User: debian-...@lists.debian.org >

Bug#790050: Solved in package version 4.0.8-2?

While I noticed this bug with linux-image-4.0.0-2-amd64 version 4.0.8-1, it seems to have disappered with 4.0.8-2. signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Processed: Re: Bug#793544: Severity is serious

Processing control commands: > severity -1 important Bug #793544 [firmware-iwlwifi] firmware-iwlwifi: iwlwifi-7265-11.ucode and iwlwifi-7265-12.ucode missing for linux 4.0 Severity set to 'important' from 'serious' -- 793544: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=793544 Debian Bug Tr

Bug#793544: Severity is serious

Control: severity -1 important On Mon, 2015-08-03 at 20:59 +0200, Bastien ROUCARIES wrote: > control: severity -1 serious > > Justification, render wireless with newer kernel totally useless on a > lot of laptop (at least my tow laptop). In Linux 4.0 the minimum firmware API version supported fo

Processed: Severity is serious

Processing control commands: > severity -1 serious Bug #793544 [firmware-iwlwifi] firmware-iwlwifi: iwlwifi-7265-11.ucode and iwlwifi-7265-12.ucode missing for linux 4.0 Severity set to 'serious' from 'normal' -- 793544: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=793544 Debian Bug Trackin

Bug#793544: Severity is serious

control: severity -1 serious Justification, render wireless with newer kernel totally useless on a lot of laptop (at least my tow laptop). Bastien -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Ar

Bug#790536: FTBFS with GCC 5: comparison of constant '-1' with boolean expression is always false

Control: reassign -1 src:linux-tools 4.0.2-1 Control: tag -1 fixed-upstream patch Hi, Martin Michlmayr (2015-06-29): > Package: linux-tools > Version: 4.0.2-1 > Severity: important > User: debian-...@lists.debian.org > Usertags: ftbfs-gcc-5 This should have been “Source: linux-tools” rather tha

Processed: Re: Bug#790536: FTBFS with GCC 5: comparison of constant '-1' with boolean expression is always false

Processing control commands: > reassign -1 src:linux-tools 4.0.2-1 Bug #790536 [linux-tools] FTBFS with GCC 5: comparison of constant '-1' with boolean expression is always false Bug reassigned from package 'linux-tools' to 'src:linux-tools'. No longer marked as found in versions 4.0.2-1. Ignorin

Processed: tagging 794327, tagging 794327

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tags 794327 + upstream Bug #794327 [src:linux] Hardware H264 capture regression in UVC subsystem: wheezy(ok) => jessie(bad) Added tag(s) upstream. > tags 794327 - fixed-upstream Bug #794327 [src:linux] Hardware H264 capture regression in UVC subs

Processed: Re: Bug#794468: general: no watchdog support in installer kernel

Processing control commands: > reassign -1 src:linux Bug #794468 {Done: m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri)} [src:debian-installer] general: no watchdog support in installer kernel Bug reassigned from package 'src:debian-installer' to 'src:linux'. Ignoring request to alter found versions of bug #794468

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Reproducibility vs signatures

Hi, On Montag, 3. August 2015, Ben Hutchings wrote: > Only the FTP team will be able to get shim signed by the Microsoft CA. > Only the FTP team will be able to sign GRUB and the kernel using the > private key for which the public part is embedded in shim. > > Users can add further trusted keys a

Processed: raise severity of GCC 5 issues

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > severity 85 serious Bug #85 [src:attica] attica: ftbfs with GCC-5 Severity set to 'serious' from 'important' > severity 777889 serious Bug #777889 [src:grantlee] grantlee: ftbfs with GCC-5 Severity set to 'serious' from 'important' > sever

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Reproducibility vs signatures

On Mon, 2015-08-03 at 12:46 +0200, Holger Levsen wrote: > Hi, > > On Montag, 3. August 2015, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > See . > > Thanks. > > That seems to say that a.) only the kernel team can sign kernels, so no user > signed kernels

Bug#794465: Bug fixes to be2net driver

Package: src:linux Version: 3.16.7-ckt11 Severity: important Don’t allow Skyhawk P1 firmware to be downloaded to Skyhawk P2 cards. Here I am submitting the patch set to fix this issue. These patches have been accepted upstream. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Reproducibility vs signatures

Hi, On Montag, 3. August 2015, Ben Hutchings wrote: > See . Thanks. That seems to say that a.) only the kernel team can sign kernels, so no user signed kernels?? and b.) only amd64, while I believe uefi arm mainboards are there alre

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Reproducibility vs signatures

On Mon, 2015-08-03 at 12:27 +0200, Holger Levsen wrote: > Hi, > > On Montag, 3. August 2015, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > That sort of works as long as there's only one architecture we want to > > do this for. But the ability to verify modules is useful in general so > > I would like to turn that on

linux_3.16.7-ckt11-1+deb8u2~bpo70+1_multi.changes ACCEPTED into wheezy-backports->backports-policy, wheezy-backports

Accepted: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Format: 1.8 Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 23:48:15 +0100 Source: linux Binary: linux-source-3.16 linux-doc-3.16 linux-manual-3.16 linux-support-3.16.0-0.bpo.4 linux-libc-dev linux-headers-3.16.0-0.bpo.4-all linux-headers-3.16.0-0.bpo.4-all-am

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Reproducibility vs signatures

Hi, On Montag, 3. August 2015, Ben Hutchings wrote: > That sort of works as long as there's only one architecture we want to > do this for. But the ability to verify modules is useful in general so > I would like to turn that on for all architectures. how is this going to work for builds on buil

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Reproducibility vs signatures

On Mon, 2015-08-03 at 10:27 +0200, Jérémy Bobbio wrote: > Ben Hutchings: > > At some point we're hopefully going to support Secure Boot on amd64. > > That means there will be a signed kernel image (separate from the > > current linux-image packages) and a signed GRUB image. The kernel > > modules

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Reproducibility vs signatures

Ben Hutchings: > At some point we're hopefully going to support Secure Boot on amd64. > That means there will be a signed kernel image (separate from the > current linux-image packages) and a signed GRUB image. The kernel > modules in the linux-image packages will also be signed, probably with > a