On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 06:54:11PM +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Sun, 2015-11-15 at 12:32 +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> > Ben Hutchings dixit:
> >
> > >> Instead of starting up, we get a kernel panic. ARAnyM console log:
> > >[...]
> > >
> > >Have you raised this with the upstream maintainers
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 11:06:54PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Thorsten,
>
> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 9:30 PM, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> > ARAnyM cannot boot the latest kernel images (still compiling,
> > but I copied out vmlinux.gz):
> >
> > tglase@tglase:~/stuff/aranym/vm2 $ ./run
> > R
Package: linux-source-3.8
Version: 3.8.3-1~experimental.1
Severity: normal
Dear Maintainer,
the builddeb script does not support m68k nor cross-compiling. The following
patch fixes this, the second part comes from this report:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/752622/
Please apply, if this is t
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 10:33:23AM -0600, dann frazier wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 06:23:14PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 01:32:48PM +, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> > > Modified: dists/trunk/linux-2.
On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 01:53:24PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Graham wrote:
> >Hello,
> >
> >I am wondering whether anyone has looked into which AMD CPUs support
> >these instructions. I would think that installing a 486 kernel on an
> >AthlonXP, for example, would be quite sub-optimal.
> >
> >
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 04:38:57PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 03:59:01PM +0100, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> > If
> > we have a lot of spare CPU cycles, we can do that, until t
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 03:14:35PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 06:49:20AM -0700, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> > * Bastian Blank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-02-04 14:08]:
> > > I'd like to schedule the upload of linux-2.6 2.6.24-3 for tomorrow.
> > BTW, are the m68k folks aware
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 10:08:36PM +0100, maximilian attems wrote:
> hey
>
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2008, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
>
> > Author: cts
> > Date: Wed Jan 30 20:47:24 2008
> > New Revision: 10283
> >
> > Log:
> > update m68k config
>
On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 11:25:29AM -0600, dann frazier wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 06:51:20AM -0500, Nestor A. Diaz wrote:
> > Hello, i am using xen under etch with 2.6.18 linux kernel, however i have
> > some issues with the sata driver with ahci enabled, according to sata linux
> > kernel
On Mon, Jul 09, 2007 at 04:38:32PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> "Christian T. Steigies" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> Does it includes the fix for #402061?
> >
> > Probably not. I added a fix to rules.real and now module.lds is included
> &
On Sun, Jul 08, 2007 at 04:21:15PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> Bastian Blank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Hi folks
> >
> > I'd like to schedule 2.6.21-6 for tuesday. It only contains a security
> > fix.
> >
> > Dann: Is there a CVE for the nf_conntrack_h323?
>
> Does it includes the fix
On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 06:45:47PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
> heya,
>
> upload planed for wednesday to experimental.
>
> to make it available, also due to dynticks it sounds like the much better
> candidate for the next d-i beta round. although there is no new xen
> patch, kvm should alre
On Sun, May 13, 2007 at 06:32:47PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Sun, May 13, 2007 at 04:19:30PM +0000, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> > +# 2.6.21
> > +# uses undefined isa_*
> > +# CONFIG_PARPORT is not set
> > +# CONFIG_PARPORT_PC is not set
>
> Please ma
On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 05:44:20PM +0200, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 03:40:25PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 03:14:55PM +0200, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> > > > This is the symptom, not the cause. Show the com
On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 03:40:25PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 03:14:55PM +0200, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> > > This is the symptom, not the cause. Show the complete log.
> > http://people.debian.org/~cts/linux-m68k/linux-2.6_2.6.21-1~experimental.1_
On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 02:30:43PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 01:33:05PM +0200, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> > after adding m68k patches, I am trying to build linux-2.6.21 from svn for
> > m68k. The build fails with:
> >
> > python2.4 de
Hi,
after adding m68k patches, I am trying to build linux-2.6.21 from svn for
m68k. The build fails with:
python2.4 debian/bin/abicheck.py debian/build/build-m68k-none-amiga m68k none
amiga
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "debian/bin/abicheck.py", line 93, in ?
sys.exit(checker(*sys
On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 02:54:32PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
> Package: usplash
> Severity: serious
> Version: 0.4-43-2
>
> dpkg-architecture: failure: unable to open triplettable: No such file or
> directory
> dpkg-buildpackage: unable to determine host architecture
> **
On Wed, Dec 20, 2006 at 05:01:33PM +0100, Michael Schmitz wrote:
> OK, here's what I found out: The only piece that is missing from 2.6.18-8
> (and, presumably, -7) is actually switching on the config options for
> FB_ATARI, KEYBOARD_ATARI and MOUSE_ATARI. These options were not new,
> that's why
Moin,
On Thu, Nov 16, 2006 at 11:36:48PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> Hi, ...
>
> As you may know, or not, we are waiting for the abi-breaking 2.6.18-6 to be
> uploaded for pushing the 2.6.18 kernel into etch.
>
> It seems 2.6.18.3 is announced for saturday, so this would mean a natural
> tentativ
On Tue, Nov 07, 2006 at 10:11:52PM +0100, Eugen Paiuc wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-11-07 at 21:32 +0100, maximilian attems wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 07, 2006 at 09:18:36PM +0100, Eugen Paiuc wrote:
> > > Hi ,
> > >
> > > The situation described in
> > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-68k/2006/11/msg00032.
On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 05:26:28PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Bastian Blank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 02:13:33PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> >> So what if it takes a bit longer and takes a bit more disk space? Try
> >> building on m68k. :)
> >
> >
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 10:19:41AM +0200, Norbert Tretkowski wrote:
> * Bastian Blank wrote:
> > The following arches did not yet switch to gcc-4.1:
> > - alpha
>
> Linux 2.6.17 doesn't compile with gcc 4.1 [...]
Same for m68k.
> > At least alpha seems to be in an unmaintained state, and this h
On Mon, Jun 19, 2006 at 08:12:06AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 18, 2006 at 04:44:01PM -0600, dann frazier wrote:
> > Yeah, istr having an issue like that as well. We should probably keep the
> > 2.6.16 compiler hardcoded to whatever is the default in etch when we
> > upload (its stil
On Sun, Jun 18, 2006 at 01:36:46PM +0200, Frederik Schueler wrote:
>
> What is the status of the other architectures?
>
> m68k
I am waiting for the linux-m68k CVS to catch up. Could happen today, or next
month... I would give it about a week.
Christian
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PRO
On Sat, May 27, 2006 at 10:51:55AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Sat, May 27, 2006 at 10:20:06AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > It seems that the i386 and amd64 autobuilders do no longer upload
> > their builds to unstable. What's going wrong? (2.6.16-14 hasn't been
> > built on amd64 yet, bu
On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 09:35:05PM +0200, Stefan Huehner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> i've noticed that there are 2 packages for/referecing the kernel 2.2
> branch in the archive.
>
> Package: kernel-patch-2.2.25-m68k
> Binary: kernel-patch-2.2.25-m68k
>
> Package: kernel-source-2.2.25
> Binary: kernel-sour
On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 05:35:08AM +0200, Daniel Baumann wrote:
> Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> > your package fails to build on m68k, as well as powerpc, ia64, and hppa with
> > similar problems.
>
> No, not similar problems.
>
> On hppa, the package FTBFS due to co
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 12:26:46AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
>
> 2.6.16.10 is scheduled for tomorrow. More than one upload per day is not
> good for the buildd network.
I am more concerend about the installer... the first m68k upload came only
with -7, since then there has never been enough ti
On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 05:48:23AM -0400, Andrew Schulman wrote:
> I have this problem, and it is not caaauused by the ATI timer bug. I don't
> have an ATI chipset, and none of the suggesssted fixes for the ATI timer
> bug (booting with disable_timer_pin_1, noapic, acpi=off, notsc, etc.) has
>
On Sun, Mar 05, 2006 at 06:26:52PM -0500, Andrew Burns wrote:
> I have been fighting the same problem for several months now and only
> today solved the problem.
>
> My machine is an emachines model T6212 and has a ATI graphics card as
> well SIS network card. I mention this because on a number o
Moin,
On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 01:01:29AM +0100, Frederik Schueler wrote:
>
> disable_timer_pin_1 is for broken ATI chipsets, see for example
Ok, that helps for the nvidia chipset, too. The mainboard is a Gigabyte
nforce4ultra (GA-K8NF9 Ultra).
> I might investigate this too concerning nvidia bo
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 09:06:09PM +0100, Frederik Schueler wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 09:00:49PM +0100, Dietmar Sieger wrote:
> > Any hint what to do, or where to search?
>
> known problem related due to broken hardware.
>
> Try the following boot parameter:
>
> disable_timer
On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 10:49:40PM +0100, Frederik Schueler wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 06:10:31PM +0100, Norbert Tretkowski wrote:
> > * Frederik Schueler wrote:
> > > The svn branch to be used is dists/trunk/linux-2.6/
> >
> > It's based on 2.6.15-3, what about the changes in -4
Moin,
On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 11:14:23PM +0100, Frederik Schueler wrote:
>
> Please raise your voice if you have open things you need to add before
> 2.6.15-6 will be uploaded; we want to make it in time for dinstall
> tomorrow.
*Raeusper*
Tomorrow as in saturday, feb 11?
Christian
--
To UN
On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 11:54:07AM +0100, Frederik Schueler wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 04:51:28PM +0100, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> > At least m68k/Amiga is currently not working and a large number of patches
> > just appeared the other day in the m68k C
On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 04:08:35PM +0100, Frederik Schueler wrote:
> Hello,
>
> looking at the changes in linux-2.6 2.6.15-4, I would like to have
> the package uploaded to unstable just in time for dinstall on wednesday.
>
> Is this ok for everyone, or does someone have important changes pendin
On Sun, Jan 29, 2006 at 01:39:42PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
>
> > Horms made a [2 presentation] about the kernel packaging in debian for
> > LCA
> > and gave two options: a.) support and backport fixes for 2.4.27 or b.)
> > go
> > with 2.4.32. Somehow he did not consider the option
Moin,
On Fri, Dec 30, 2005 at 09:49:50AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 29, 2005 at 11:28:59PM +0100, Frederik Schueler wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I would like to get on with the preparations of 2.6.15-rc7 and
> > schedule an upload to experimental for tomorrow evening UTC.
m68k is unabl
Hi,
On Tue, Dec 06, 2005 at 03:48:40PM +0100, Max Vozeler wrote:
> Package: linux-2.6
> Version: 2.6.12-10
> Severity: important
>
> This bug is a bit weird :-)
>
> Apparently the binaries in m68k -headers were built for i386.
Yes, this may very well be possible, since the m68k linux-* packages
On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 09:56:08AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 01:10:20PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> >
> > Christian, just a heads up. The linux-2.6 in sid is, as of yesterday,
> > in sid/linux-2.6. This is what was up until yesterday trunk/linux-2.6.
> >
> > Don't shoot the me
What is this email address? "Christian T. Steigies" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I have never used that, I don't even know that machine... Sven, you should
fix your mail client.
On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 08:32:14AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 03:35:02PM -0800
On Wed, Aug 24, 2005 at 04:50:35PM -0600, dann frazier wrote:
>
> This is a stable-security update. Horms has also created packages for
> an unstable update of 2.4.27, but that's a separate topic.
> Unfortunately it sounds like we cannot upload a source package and have
> the autobuilders do it -
On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 03:22:02PM -0600, dann frazier wrote:
> We're getting closer. Please check this for accuracy:
> http://wiki.debian.net/?DebianKernelSargeUpdateStatus
>
> I can try to do hppa this afternoon; any word on m68k, mips & s390?
I am having problems getting a cross-compiler fo
On Tue, Aug 16, 2005 at 03:31:22PM +0900, Horms wrote:
>
> On the topic of Sid, I think we need to keep 2.4.27 there for now.
> I've been told that the s390 installer works it, and its needed
> for some m68k flavours (mac users who want a working keyboard IRRC).
Mac users who want a working keybo
On Sat, Jul 16, 2005 at 12:39:55PM +0300, Andres Salomon wrote:
> Alright folks, I think the packaging is ready to be beaten on by people.
> So, unless anyone has any concerns/problems/etc, I'm going to assume
> everything's a go for uploading 2.6.12.
>
> The current changes and state of the pack
On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 01:08:21PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 12:52:19PM +0200, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> >
> > I have a couple of questions regarding kernel-headers. The 2.6 packages for
> > m68k do not build kernel-headers yet, but they will
On Sun, May 15, 2005 at 09:10:13PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Sun, May 15, 2005 at 02:39:14PM -0400, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> >
> > kernel-headers-$(version)-$(abiname)
> > This is arch-specific headers package containing all the common
> > headers/configs/Makefiles, etc.
>
> In the thre
e a few ideas from i386 kernel-image package for selecting config
and to determine kernel-tree version
* this needs to go into sarge so that m68k kernel-images can be rebuilt
from sarge sources
-- Christian T. Steigies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Fri, 18 Mar 2005 11:49:13 +0100
kernel-image-2
On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 03:18:28PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Does this mean that the common kernel source package would no
> longer use make-kpkg to build the image? If not, why not co-ordinate
> with kernel-package to get a common mechanism of creating control and
> conf
On Sun, Apr 24, 2005 at 07:11:36PM +0200, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
> Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> [snip]
> > > Only for some m68k and sparc subarchitectures, and the m68k ones
> > > have still no newer 2.4 version available. (Status as shown by
> > > http://peop
On Sun, Apr 24, 2005 at 06:48:25PM +0200, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
> Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> > There are still many packages for 2.4.25 and 2.4.26 in unstable.
> > Is there any reason not to file a bug against ftp.debian.org to
> > remove these? I could take care of that if nobody from
On Wed, Apr 13, 2005 at 02:38:15PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> Right now I'd like to build from kernel-tree 2.4.27-10, thanks
I finally updated the m68k packages to use the kernel-tree package. If I
want to upload this, built against k-t-2.4.27-9 (or 10?), these packages
should not go into sarge? Did y
On Thu, Jan 20, 2005 at 04:58:10PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> > I uploaded new 2.6.8 kernel-images for m68k a week ago, but I did not make
> > it
> > urgent...: Too young, only 7 of 10 days old
> > For 2.4.27 I am waiting for the latest k
On Thu, Jan 20, 2005 at 04:13:17PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
>
> Update for current status, 10 days after my first mail:
>
> m68k
> No abiname; not updated. ?
>
> [This is another arch that I'd consider releasing d-i rc3 without
> it being updated for the kernel security fixes.]
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 02:53:32PM -0500, Debian Installer wrote:
> Rejected: Rejected: kernel-image-power3-smp_2.6.9-2_powerpc.deb: old version
> (100) in unstable >= new version (2.6.9-2) targeted at unstable.
[...]
Can somebody please do something about this, or do we have to receive the
same m
On Thu, Sep 02, 2004 at 03:38:29PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>
> You are mistaken. The amd64 kernel has the 32bit emulation layer
> compiled in so it is fully capable of running an i386 linux
> installation. You can also install ia32-libs and the (not quite
> perfected) ia32-libs-openoffi
On Thu, Sep 02, 2004 at 02:26:24PM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote:
>
> In RedHat I have seen config lines in fstab like
>
> LABEL=root/ ext3defaults0 1
>
> or something similar. If you label your root partition
> "root", then it shouldn't matter whether its /dev/sda1
> or /dev/
Moin,
On Thu, Sep 02, 2004 at 07:43:43AM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> >
> >The problem is, the kernel does not find the root filesystem, since it does
> >not detect the harddisk. This box (ASUS K8V mainboard) has one SATA disk
> >connected to the VIA VT8237 RAID controller, the Promise 20376 is no
On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 11:10:15PM +0200, Frederik Schueler wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 07:53:28PM +0200, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> > I have installed Debian-i386 and Debian-amd64 on a new machine. For the i386
> > install I used a sarge snapshot from Jul
Hi,
I have installed Debian-i386 and Debian-amd64 on a new machine. For the i386
install I used a sarge snapshot from July, which worked great. Only this
installed a 2.6.6 kernel, which I'd like to update to 2.6.8. On the AMD64
installation, I simply installed new debian kernel-images and everythin
On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 01:37:19PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
It has recently been brought to our attention that you are offering software
for download... is this the RIAA talking to me?
> It has recently been brought to our attention that you have 2.6 kernels
> available at :
>
> http://peopl
On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 12:49:08AM -0600, dann frazier wrote:
>
> Another argument for 2.4.26 is that going to a releaseable 2.4.26 image
> is just a rebuild of the existing 2.4.26 package, while some archs with 2.4.26
> images don't already have 2.4.27 packages (m68, arm, sparc)[1]. Going with
>
On Mon, Aug 16, 2004 at 02:47:42PM -0400, Debian Installer wrote:
>
> Accepted:
> kernel-doc-2.4.27_2.4.27-2_all.deb
> to pool/main/k/kernel-source-2.4.27/kernel-doc-2.4.27_2.4.27-2_all.deb
> kernel-patch-debian-2.4.27_2.4.27-2_all.deb
> to
> pool/main/k/kernel-source-2.4.27/kernel-patch-debi
On Sat, Aug 07, 2004 at 12:58:56PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
>
> kernel-image-2.4.25-amiga/2.4.25-1
Please do not remove this, I am having problems with accessing webpages (and
thus downloading packages) with 2.4.26 and still have no idea why. In short,
do not remove any of the 2.4.25 packages
On Fri, Aug 06, 2004 at 10:33:37AM +0200, Jens Schmalzing wrote:
>
> If you just replace the patch, you will break the path between the
> first and the second revision, because you get:
So when I want to create an updated patch, I need a tree with the first
patch applied, a tree with the second p
On Mon, Jun 28, 2004 at 03:55:51PM +0200, Frederik Schueler wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Jun 28, 2004 at 03:13:10PM +0200, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> > On my notebook it takes ages to load the kernel image. With initrd it takes
> > a lot longer to load, since initrd is so big
On Mon, Jun 28, 2004 at 02:00:00PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Jeff Bailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Thu, 2004-06-24 at 03:35, Thibaut VARENE wrote:
> >
> >> RE Jens' mail: the initrd used is the stock one, I didn't change
> >> anything (yet).
> >
> > Please note that the initr
On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 03:37:42PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Andrew Pollock ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040610 09:40]:
> > Do we need to have three different RAID packages in sarge?
> >
> > >From the package description, it's only necessary for unpatched 2.2
> > >kernels.
> >
> > Given that we're
On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 07:50:22PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Currently I can only see powerpc and some older ia64 patches in addition
> to the basic kernel source, are there any other architectures working on
> 2.6 kernels?
I can not say I am working on it, I haven't got it working on i386
On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 09:40:16AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
> Especially for the slower architectures having done a compile with a
> crosscompiler before the source package is handed to the buildd is very
> important to avoid FTBFSs.
Good idea, I've been trying that recently. Unfortunate
On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 05:27:37PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Christian T. Steigies ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040517 16:10]:
> > On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 03:35:34PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
>
> > > All I wish is that we reduce the number of source packages for the
> >
On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 03:35:34PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
>
> > > see http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2004/04/msg06531.html for an
>
> > > explanaition.
>
> > Oh... how come I've never seen this before? I thought I subscribed to
> > debian-k
On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 10:02:03AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Francesco P. Lovergine ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040517 09:55]:
> > On Sun, May 16, 2004 at 09:34:46AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
>
> > > One other change I'd like to see ASAP is to having a "first class
> > > architecture set" instead
On Tue, May 11, 2004 at 05:15:56PM -0500, Adam Majer wrote:
>
> 1. How and who will take over the lead of kernel maintenance?
I do hope that Herbert stays the kernel maintainer.
> 2. Where will we have the kernel sources? Will these reside in a CVS? Or
> bitkeeper?
Bitkeeper? How many people
Hi,
two questions which I hope are on topic for this list.
Will there be a kernel-source-2.2.26 package?
What is the purpose of the kernel-kbuild-2.6-x packages?
Description: Linux kernel 2.6 kbuild tools
This package provides kbuild tools for Linux kernel 2.6. It is used together
with the
76 matches
Mail list logo
