linux-signed-arm64_6.10.1+1~exp1_source.changes uploaded successfully to
localhost
along with the files:
linux-signed-arm64_6.10.1+1~exp1.dsc
linux-signed-arm64_6.10.1+1~exp1.tar.xz
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon (running on host usper.debian.org)
Mapping rc-buggy to experimental.
binary:linux-headers-arm64-16k is NEW.
binary:linux-image-6.10-arm64-16k is NEW.
binary:linux-image-arm64-16k 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 g
linux_6.9.12-1_source.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
linux_6.9.12-1.dsc
linux_6.9.12.orig.tar.xz
linux_6.9.12-1.debian.tar.xz
linux_6.9.12-1_source.buildinfo
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon (running on host usper.debian.org)
binary:acpi-modules-6.9.12-686-di is NEW.
binary:acpi-modules-6.9.12-686-pae-di is NEW.
binary:affs-modules-6.9.12-5kc-malta-di is NEW.
binary:affs-modules-6.9.12-loongson-3-di is NEW.
binary:affs-modules-6.9.12-mips64r2el-di is NEW.
binary:affs-modules-6.9.12-octeon-di is NEW.
binary:ata-modules-6
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reassign 1077274 initramfs-tools-core
Bug #1077274 [src:linux] linux-image-6.9.11-amd64: intird 3x bigger since Linux
6.9.10
Bug reassigned from package 'src:linux' to 'initramfs-tools-core'.
No longer marked as found in versions linux/6.9.11-1.
I've just replicated this bug on Ubuntu-24.04 (kernel 6.8.0-39-generic), so it
seems to be an upstream bug rather than a Debian specific.
Hi
I would like to upload linux version 6.9.12-1. This is a small
increment on top of 6.9.11 but notably it fixes CVE-2024-41090 and
CVE-2024-41091, cf.
https://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2024/07/24/4 .
No packaging changes are done.
Regards,
Salvatore
signature.asc
Description: PGP s
Package: src:linux
Version: 6.9.11-1
Severity: normal
Dear Maintainer,
When using 6.9.10 or older, the initrd is 3x bigger. In 6.9.9, the size
of the initrd is ~80M. From 6.9.10, it is ~250M. Is this on purpose?
This plays poorly with the default /boot size, that ~5 years ago when I
installe
On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 17:49:13 +0300 jim_p wrote:
[...]
> Sunday report... on Monday afternoon because I forgot about it. Like with the
> previous change, adding "After=remote-fs.target" did not change much. It still
> fails like half the times, like it does with the other parameter or with
> neith
linux-signed-amd64_6.10.1+1~exp1_source.changes uploaded successfully to
localhost
along with the files:
linux-signed-amd64_6.10.1+1~exp1.dsc
linux-signed-amd64_6.10.1+1~exp1.tar.xz
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon (running on host usper.debian.org)
Thank you for your contribution to Debian.
Mapping rc-buggy to experimental.
Accepted:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2024 17:53:15 +0200
Source: linux-signed-amd64
Architecture: source
Version: 6.10.1+1~exp1
Distribution: rc-buggy
Urgency: medium
Processing control commands:
> reopen -1
Bug #1077238 {Done: Diederik de Haas }
[firmware-misc-nonfree] Upgrade will break networking, thus unable to download
missing packages
Bug reopened
Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #1077238 to the same values
previously set
> retitle -1 Pl
Control: reopen -1
Control: retitle -1 Please extend NEWS to clarify what users can and should do
On Saturday, 27 July 2024 11:30:37 CEST Dan Jacobson wrote:
> Yes. The news item needs to warn:
>
> ** Warning: if you take no action, upon the next boot you might
> 1. Not be able to network.
> 2. N
Yes. The news item needs to warn:
** Warning: if you take no action, upon the next boot you might
1. Not be able to network.
2. Not be able to see your screen.
3. Not be able to boot.
and thus unable to install the new packages to fix it too.
Therefore be sure to install the new packages ... now,
On Saturday, 27 July 2024 10:54:22 CEST Dan Jacobson wrote:
> That's exactly what happened to me.
> Not all users automatically install recommends.
Those users are ofc allowed to make that choice, but they then also accept the
consequences that go with it.
What you asked for is exactly how it wa
Your message dated Sat, 27 Jul 2024 10:12:00 +0200
with message-id <2628657.L8QfnQrbHx@bagend>
and subject line Re: Bug#1077238: Upgrade will break networking, thus unable to
download missing packages
has caused the Debian Bug report #1077238,
regarding Upgrade will break networking, thus unable t
Your message dated Sat, 27 Jul 2024 08:02:27 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1076962: fixed in linux 6.10.1-1~exp1
has caused the Debian Bug report #1076962,
regarding linux: Enable CONFIG_NETKIT=m
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Your message dated Sat, 27 Jul 2024 08:02:27 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1076062: fixed in linux 6.10.1-1~exp1
has caused the Debian Bug report #1076062,
regarding linux-image-6.9.8-amd64: missing module snd_soc_avs_max98927
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the
Your message dated Sat, 27 Jul 2024 08:02:27 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1076457: fixed in linux 6.10.1-1~exp1
has caused the Debian Bug report #1076457,
regarding linux-image-amd64 built without VDO support
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been
Your message dated Sat, 27 Jul 2024 08:02:27 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1074217: fixed in linux 6.10.1-1~exp1
has caused the Debian Bug report #1074217,
regarding ppc64el default page size too large for typical use cases
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the pro
Your message dated Sat, 27 Jul 2024 08:02:27 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1076570: fixed in linux 6.10.1-1~exp1
has caused the Debian Bug report #1076570,
regarding Request for enabling more EROFS compression algorithms
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the proble
Your message dated Sat, 27 Jul 2024 08:02:27 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1072968: fixed in linux 6.10.1-1~exp1
has caused the Debian Bug report #1072968,
regarding linux-image-6.7.12-arm64: Add support for Mediatek MT7986 SoC
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the
Your message dated Sat, 27 Jul 2024 08:02:27 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1072574: fixed in linux 6.10.1-1~exp1
has caused the Debian Bug report #1072574,
regarding Enable Renesas RZ/G3S and RZ/V2H boards
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been deal
Your message dated Sat, 27 Jul 2024 08:02:27 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1072311: fixed in linux 6.10.1-1~exp1
has caused the Debian Bug report #1072311,
regarding linux-perf can (and should) link against libdebuginfod
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the proble
Your message dated Sat, 27 Jul 2024 08:02:27 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1067908: fixed in linux 6.10.1-1~exp1
has caused the Debian Bug report #1067908,
regarding Enable I6300ESB_WDT
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is n
Package: firmware-misc-nonfree
Version: 20240709-1
> Several firmware files were moved from firmware-misc-nonfree into
> their own package
Are you sure that won't break networking for some people? Best to have a
transitional package that pulls in the rest, and leave it up to the user
to remove
Thank you for your contribution to Debian.
Accepted:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2024 17:53:15 +0200
Source: linux
Architecture: source
Version: 6.10.1-1~exp1
Distribution: experimental
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian Kernel Team
Changed-By
27 matches
Mail list logo
