* Andreas Barth [Fri, 06 Jun 2008 07:30:06 +0200]:
> The mechanismn: yes. But not FauxPackages itself, as I think we could
> generate that list automatic. (For a short-term solution, FauxPackages
> might just be ok.)
I meant, yes, adding to FauxPackages an automatically-generated list,
not a list
Hallo Paul,
am Fri, Jun 06, 2008 at 11:30:29AM +0800 hast du folgendes geschrieben:
> glest and glest-data appear to need a hint to go into testing together.
hinted, thanks.
Kind regards,
Philipp Kern
--
.''`. Philipp Kern Debian Developer
: :' : http://philkern.d
* Adeodato Simó ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [080605 22:41]:
> * Andreas Barth [Wed, 04 Jun 2008 07:19:07 +0200]:
>
> > Is there a reasonable way to
> > generate pseudo-packages "taskel-$task" that depend on all the packages
> > that need to be present to not break anything?
>
> I think britney's FauxPack
Hi RMs,
glest and glest-data appear to need a hint to go into testing together.
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'd like to propose the following update for stable.
I've tested on an etch laptop w/ built-in intel 3945 wireless and a
server w/ a bnx2 nic under both etch and etchnhalf.
Index: debian/changelog
===
--- debian/changelog(.../rel
On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 02:35:22PM -0600, Bdale Garbee wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-05-27 at 02:56 -0600, dann frazier wrote:
>
> > Other than the testing I mentioned above, I've also had successful test
> > reports from Bdale and Tim Cutts (on albeniz.d.o, iirc).
>
> For completeness, let me report det
Adeodato Simó wrote:
> Could there be one? Well, if you're interested in having the same
> safeguard mechanism in place for these packages.
It would be nice to have one, but many different parts of d-i decide
what to apt-install, so extracting a list is hard.
--
see shy jo
signature.asc
Descri
* Andreas Barth [Wed, 04 Jun 2008 07:19:07 +0200]:
> Is there a reasonable way to
> generate pseudo-packages "taskel-$task" that depend on all the packages
> that need to be present to not break anything?
I think britney's FauxPackages would just be very appropriate for this?
(For those reading a
On Tue, 2008-05-27 at 02:56 -0600, dann frazier wrote:
> Other than the testing I mentioned above, I've also had successful test
> reports from Bdale and Tim Cutts (on albeniz.d.o, iirc).
For completeness, let me report details. I updated ds10.gag.com running
etch and stock kernel package linux-
On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 01:32:33PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> Hi,
>
> * dann frazier ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [080527 10:56]:
> > etch's aboot doesn't permit booting recent 2.6 kernels. While
> > backporting a fix for this issue, I ran into a couple of other build
> > issues that prevent etch's aboo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2008-06-04 18:36, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> No it's not. A user that prefers to have broken software rather than
> no software (if the option "non broken" software is absent) should use
> unstable. I mean it.
>
> You can easily use testing by de
Le mercredi 04 juin 2008 à 10:30 -0700, Mike Bird a écrit :
> On Wed June 4 2008 09:36:07 Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> > Package: *
> > Pin: release a=testing
> > Pin-Priority: 990
> >
> > Package: *
> > Pin: release a=unstable
> > Pin-Priority: 500
>
> Downsides include:
>
>
12 matches
Mail list logo
