On Tuesday 08 September 2009, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> Frans Pop wrote:
> > I agree that at this point an update qcontrol is the most obvious
> > solution. I'll wait for confirmation from SRM before preparing an
> > upload.
>
> Please go ahead with the qcontrol update.
Thanks Adam.
It turns out t
Frans Pop wrote:
I agree that at this point an update qcontrol is the most obvious
solution. I'll wait for confirmation from SRM before preparing an
upload.
Please go ahead with the qcontrol update.
Regards,
Adam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a su
On Sep 08, Frans Pop wrote:
> Especially when you know (well, assuming perfect memory ;-) that the
> device name in question is being used and changing it is known to break
> another package. I'll happily assume that you did simply forget or
> overlooked that fact when preparing the upload, bu
On Tuesday 08 September 2009, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Sep 08, Frans Pop wrote:
> > - upload a new version of qcontrol to follow udev
> > Probably the simplest option. I strongly doubt there are any other
> > users of the persistent device name.
>
> Probably the best solution, since I just backp
On Sep 08, Frans Pop wrote:
> - upload a new version of qcontrol to follow udev
> Probably the simplest option. I strongly doubt there are any other users
> of the persistent device name.
Probably the best solution, since I just backported an upstream bug fix
(that name with a missing compone
Please CC everyone on replies.
On Tuesday 08 September 2009, Nis Martensen wrote:
> Package: qcontrol
> Followup-For: Bug #524505
>
> With the recent udev update in Lenny (Version 0.125-7+lenny3), qcontrol
> no longer works:
> qcontrol error: gpio_keys device not available (warning).
This is pret
6 matches
Mail list logo
