On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, Andres Salomon wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Jul 2008 09:15:14 +0200
> maximilian attems <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 10:09:43PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> [...]
> > >
> > > I'm having serious trouble parsing what you're trying to say here.
> > > Could you re
Any reason debian-boot was dropped from CCs?
Andres Salomon wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Jul 2008 09:15:14 +0200
> Not to mention OLPC support; it would be *really* nice to be able to
> use d-i to install Debian onto an XO. Of course, other things
> (grub-under-OFW or just plain OFW support, jffs2 formatti
On Tue, 8 Jul 2008 09:15:14 +0200
maximilian attems <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 10:09:43PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
[...]
> >
> > I'm having serious trouble parsing what you're trying to say here.
> > Could you rephrase?
>
> you never checked the rh kernel. they do a *lot
On Tue, 8 Jul 2008 09:15:14 +0200
maximilian attems <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > When a new stable *is* uploaded, D-I should be able to switch
> > faster too (at least, if there's someone willing to do the initial
> > kernel-wedge work) as the main criterium for D-I to switch to a new
> > k
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 10:09:43PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Monday 07 July 2008, maximilian attems wrote:
> > > There are valid arguments to be found for staying with 2.6.25 a bit
> > > longer, but "D-I has not yet converted to it" is NOT one of them.
> >
> > testing users are currently on an u
On Monday 07 July 2008, maximilian attems wrote:
> > There are valid arguments to be found for staying with 2.6.25 a bit
> > longer, but "D-I has not yet converted to it" is NOT one of them.
>
> testing users are currently on an unsupported kernel.
Eh, how does that follow my last para which I ass
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 05:30:09PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> (adding d-kernel and d-release)
>
> On Monday 07 July 2008, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> > Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > On Thursday 03 July 2008, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> > >> > please hint linux-2.6 2.6.25-6, linux-kbuild-2.6
* Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-07-07 17:30]:
> In fact, having 2.6.25 in testing would possibly make it easier for
> the kernel team to do a final (?) 2.6.25 upload with latest stable
> updates.
FWIW, I fully agree. In the past, we never waited for all arches in
d-i to move to a new kernel
(adding d-kernel and d-release)
On Monday 07 July 2008, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Thursday 03 July 2008, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> >> > please hint linux-2.6 2.6.25-6, linux-kbuild-2.6 2.6.25-2,
> >> > linux-modules-extra-2.6 2.6.25-5
> >>
> >> Please wai
9 matches
Mail list logo
