On Tuesday 05 February 2008, dann frazier wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 01:53:43AM +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
> > Finally I created the etch-support udeb which does two things:
> > 1) add an early base-installer hook script that sets the 'altmeta'
> >template
> > 2) add an partman init.d hook s
* Otavio Salvador <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-02-05 16:43]:
> d-i itself isn't receiving deeply changes latelly (except latest Frans
> partman improvements but that has been very well test by him, as
> usual) and other minor things. I guess we could do another in begin of
> April or so, dunno for sur
Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Given we're doing a beta based on 2.6.22 now, how quickly could we get
> another beta based on 2.6.24 out? Can you be done relatively quickly
> after the beta based on 2.6.22?
I guess we can.
d-i itself isn't receiving deeply changes latelly (excep
* dann frazier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-02-05 01:13]:
> On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 05:23:14PM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> > As suggested by Frans, with many good points, we'll release with
> > 2.6.22 but just after it, we'll start to work to release another beta
> > with 2.6.24 kernel.
>
> This
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 01:53:43AM +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
> Finally I created the etch-support udeb which does two things:
> 1) add an early base-installer hook script that sets the 'altmeta'
>template
> 2) add an partman init.d hook script that changes the default
>inode_size from 256 to
On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 05:23:14PM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> As suggested by Frans, with many good points, we'll release with
> 2.6.22 but just after it, we'll start to work to release another beta
> with 2.6.24 kernel.
This should allow us to install a etchnhalf 2.6.24 on hardware supported
Quoting Frans Pop ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Sorry for the long explanation below, but I really want people to understand
> what is happening and why so we are agreed on this implementation and don't
> have nasty surprises after the point release.
Your mail (which I read carefully) requires ACK fr
On Sunday 03 February 2008, Frans Pop wrote:
> I have been quite disappointed that there was no real follow-up to my
> mails, which now leaves us in the situation that there is basically no
> support yet to select the correct kernel for etch+1/2.
Being the sucker that I am, I did start to look int
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
With all comments that has been sent to this thread, I've changed the
timeline to the following:
+--+---+
| Date | What happens |
+---
On Friday 01 February 2008, dann frazier wrote:
> Is there anything special we need to add to deal with etch 1/2
> kernel metapackages? We were talking about using a name like
> linux-image-2.6-686-etchnhalf.
As I explained in my mails re etch+1/2 some time back [1] , D-I simply will
not install
Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Otavio Salvador wrote:
>>We have 2.6.22 as a safe bed on lenny now and their udebs are there
>>too however since EtchAndHalf intends to release with 2.6.24 and it
>>has been uploaded to sid already I'm considering a better option to
>>us to r
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 01, 2008 at 09:51:07PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> It's far to early to switch d-i to 2.6.24, especially since it drops
> support for most of /proc/acpi, including the parts used by
> laptop-detect.
I still think this switch was an extremely premature and really, really
bad idea.
On Fri, Feb 01, 2008 at 09:51:07PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> It's far to early to switch d-i to 2.6.24, especially since it drops
> support for most of /proc/acpi, including the parts used by
> laptop-detect.
I suspect you already know this, but for the record, that's not an
intrinsic property of
Otavio Salvador wrote:
>We have 2.6.22 as a safe bed on lenny now and their udebs are there
>too however since EtchAndHalf intends to release with 2.6.24 and it
>has been uploaded to sid already I'm considering a better option to
>us to release with it.
>
>linux-2.6 has been bu
On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 08:04:23PM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> - kernel to release
>
>We have 2.6.22 as a safe bed on lenny now and their udebs are there
>too however since EtchAndHalf intends to release with 2.6.24 and it
>has been uploaded to sid already I'm considering a better
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[ Reply-To adjusted to debian-boot so we can keep this discussion in a
single mailing list ]
Hello folks,
I've been working at migrations of packages for lenny and I think
we're more or less fine to define a timeline to the end of Febuary for
the r
16 matches
Mail list logo
