On Sun, 12 Dec 1999, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> I just spent a couple of hours going through the list, verifying some
> things and fixing stuff. Vincent: frankly I'm annoyed that I had to do
> this, since this is your job.
Ok, I agree I should have put the y2k fixes in Incoming/ sooner, but I
ju
Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I thought it was bootdisk-only, i.e., it doesn't need to be uploaded as such.
> We still need the fully-featured kernel as our k-image package.
I guess I had problems uploading my version of 2.0.38 -- .changes file rejected.
If you guys want Herbert's 2.0
>I thought it was bootdisk-only, i.e., it doesn't need to be uploaded as such.
>We still need the fully-featured kernel as our k-image package.
Well, it was rejected anyway.
.Adam Di [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.onShore.com/>
On Thu, Dec 09, 1999 at 02:14:42PM -0500, Adam Di Carlo wrote:
>
> I've built (but not yet uploaded) a new version of 2.0.38 which fits.
> Here's what I changed:
>
>* remove options to reduce kernel size:
> CONFIG_BLK_DEV_DAC960, CONFIG_FIREWALL, CONFIG_SYN_COOKIES,
> CONFIG_IP_ACCT
The signs are agreeing with a release, since the m68k machine I was
building stuff on crashed today. Figures.
Anyway, the 2.1r4 release will happen tomorrow (Monday). I have all
the packages recompiled now, so everything should be ready. Pending
missing dependencies, those still need to be checke
5 matches
Mail list logo
