On Tue, Oct 05, 2004 at 12:39:00AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Please consider moving perl to testing, updating MIME:Base64 to
> version 3.03, needed by MIME-tools 5.413. MIME-tools 5.413 fixes some
> important bugs compared to the version currently in sarge. Brendan,
> the Perl package maintain
Please consider moving perl to testing, updating MIME:Base64 to
version 3.03, needed by MIME-tools 5.413. MIME-tools 5.413 fixes some
important bugs compared to the version currently in sarge. Brendan,
the Perl package maintainer agreed to this proposal.
Thanks, Matthias
Package: kernel-patch-powerpc
Version: N/A; reported 2004-10-04
Severity: normal
How can this be suggested on an official packaged kernel?
* To change the built-in command line on a PReP system, run mkvmlinuz
and then open the vmlinuz file with a binary editor (emacs is fine).
Locate th
what about changing the 486 emulation kernel patch so that it completely
disables itself on non 386 processors
this way it would only have security issues on pure 386 which wouldn't be
supported at all otherwise
> -Original Message-
> From: Martin Schulze [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent
On Mon, Oct 04, 2004 at 06:52:53PM +0200, Noèl Köthe wrote:
> Am Sonntag, den 03.10.2004, 21:38 -0700 schrieb Steve Langasek:
> > I'm not going to accept an upload to t-p-u that makes off-point,
> > substantial changes to the build rules. Pushing this from unstable to
> > testing might be doable,
Rob Bradford wrote:
> I think we should push this matter through with an updated kernel in a 3.0r3
> update before the release of sarge. People could then upgrade to that before
> upgrading to sarge. And in my opinion would make the upgrade process much
> simpler and more straightforward. And as re
Am Sonntag, den 03.10.2004, 21:38 -0700 schrieb Steve Langasek:
> > If you (release and security team) don't have any objections I will
> > upload -7 to testing-proposed-updates in the next 2 days.
>
> You might want to fix the build dependencies first.
>
> dpkg-buildpackage: host architecture i
peter green wrote:
> calling stuff i386 when it will not run natively on a 386 seems like asking
> for confustion to me
True, but we're way to close to a release to fix *that*. And I'm not
sure that we could easily fix binary-i386 at all..
> why and when was this instruction emulation needed in
On Mon, Oct 04, 2004 at 12:17:38AM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> if I understood it correctly, the issue was with Architecture: all
> packages whose recommends are only available on some architectures
> (e.g., education-common recommending grub).
I really think the right fix is to make those
I have a TESTING system with no self-compiled programs. Sending mails from
evolution to a postscript printer via cups /x print server results in
printer activity (blinking), no print-out and if the print-job is canceled
in CUPS the parallel connection is blocked for any other job till the
computer
On Sun, Oct 03, 2004 at 07:54:12PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Steve Langasek wrote:
> > The d-i images really need to be built from kernel-image packages that
> > are in the archive at the time we ship. Optimizing for 486 isn't a very
> > good reason on its own to force another kernel build cycle.
* Adeodato Simó ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041004 00:20]:
> * Matthias Klose [Sun, 03 Oct 2004 23:35:52 +0200]:
> > Andreas Barth writes:
> > > + the already discussed topic of recommends (IMHO yes, as main should be
> > > a closure, and broken recommends break that; although I tend to
> > > sarge-ig
12 matches
Mail list logo
