On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 12:44:33PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 08, 2005 at 09:38:49AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 12:55:48PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > Horms,
> > > > The current d-i kernel image is linux-kernel-di-sparc-2.6 0.05.
> > > > I am not sure which
On Fri, Apr 08, 2005 at 09:38:49AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 12:55:48PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > Horms,
> > > The current d-i kernel image is linux-kernel-di-sparc-2.6 0.05.
> > > I am not sure which version of kernel-source this is based on,
> > > as a quick glanc
On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 12:55:48PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Horms,
> > The current d-i kernel image is linux-kernel-di-sparc-2.6 0.05.
> > I am not sure which version of kernel-source this is based on,
> > as a quick glance of the .dsc seems to indicate that the
> > source dependancy is not v
On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 12:55:48PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Horms,
>
> On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 04:34:34PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> > I have been looking into the Blade1500 clock chip problem on request
> > from Dave Miller. It seems that while we have a solution in the pipeline
> > for 2.4.27,
Horms,
On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 04:34:34PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> I have been looking into the Blade1500 clock chip problem on request
> from Dave Miller. It seems that while we have a solution in the pipeline
> for 2.4.27, that is getting kernel-image-sparc 2.4.27-9 into testing and
> d-i once gluc
Hi,
I have been looking into the Blade1500 clock chip problem on request
from Dave Miller. It seems that while we have a solution in the pipeline
for 2.4.27, that is getting kernel-image-sparc 2.4.27-9 into testing and
d-i once gluck comes back, the same cannot be said for 2.6.8.
I had a quick lo
6 matches
Mail list logo
