(Dropped private CCs)
On Monday 01 March 2010, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
* the binary-only kernel we're working with, they haven't even
bothered to put in ext2,3 or 4
ext4 is enabled.
From dmesg:
EXT4-fs warning: checktime reached, running e2fsck is recommended
EXT4 FS on mmcblk0p3,
On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 9:55 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
l...@lkcl.net wrote:
On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 7:02 PM, Hector Oron zu...@debian.org wrote:
Hello,
hi hector, this is a timely message / issue to raise: it's very
relevant for the (newly discovered) CT-PC89E arm netbook which a
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 3:59 PM, Benjamin Henrion b...@udev.org wrote:
Do you know where I can buy such device?
cc'd to adam gill, he's the person with direct contact with the factory.
[ the rest of this message is informational, for your benefit, ben,
and also for anyone else who'd like one,
On Mon, 1 Mar 2010, Hector Oron wrote:
Hello,
Nowadays, the number of devices (non x86) is growing and growing.
Lots of these devices have not upstream linux kernel support, which
makes it a bit harder to maintain in the context of debian-installer.
Also, afaict, debian-installer team does
On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 11:48:55AM -0500, JLB wrote:
I have a suggestion. The best solution to the 'devices shipped with
hard/impossible-to-change binary kernels' problem, as far as I can tell,
would have to come not from the Debian team, but from the upstream kernel
team.
Namely, if
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 11:48, JLB j...@twu.net wrote:
Namely, if there was ALWAYS a way (which could not be turned off) to extract
a kernel's configuration (in a format which could be plunked into
/usr/src/linux and used to build new modules) from the running kernel,
things would be much
Hello,
Nowadays, the number of devices (non x86) is growing and growing.
Lots of these devices have not upstream linux kernel support, which
makes it a bit harder to maintain in the context of debian-installer.
Also, afaict, debian-installer team does not like to add complexity to
d-i, which I
On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 7:02 PM, Hector Oron zu...@debian.org wrote:
Hello,
hi hector, this is a timely message / issue to raise: it's very
relevant for the (newly discovered) CT-PC89E arm netbook which a
friend of mine found.
Nowadays, the number of devices (non x86) is growing and growing.
On Tue, Jun 20, 2006 at 01:29:38PM +0200, Geert Stappers wrote:
On Tue, Jun 20, 2006 at 11:45:00AM +0200, Andreas Jochens wrote:
Hello,
Holger Levsen wrote:
which solution do you think is better? the cross-installer (isnt there
one for amd64 already?) or the native installer
On Tue, Jun 20, 2006 at 11:45:00AM +0200, Andreas Jochens wrote:
Hello,
Holger Levsen wrote:
which solution do you think is better? the cross-installer (isnt there
one for amd64 already?) or the native installer?
There is currently no cross-installer for amd64 as far as I know
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Geert Stappers) writes:
On Tue, Jun 20, 2006 at 11:45:00AM +0200, Andreas Jochens wrote:
Hello,
Holger Levsen wrote:
which solution do you think is better? the cross-installer (isnt there
one for amd64 already?) or the native installer?
There is currently no cross
11 matches
Mail list logo
