#include
Adam Di Carlo wrote on Thu Apr 11, 2002 um 01:51:10AM:
> Eduard, there's no point in debating this on this list. kernel-image
> changes must be approved by the maintainer of that package. Whether
> the changed package (and i386 b-f rebuild) is accepted in woody is up
> to the release
#include
Matt Zimmerman wrote on Mon Apr 08, 2002 um 02:08:53PM:
> > > What part of that don't you understand?
> >
> > The "wtf no without any GOOD reasons" part.
>
> "We want to actually make a release" is good enough reason for me.
Me too, and there is no reason why the change would hold up
On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 02:36:35PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> Anthony Towns wrote on Sat Apr 06, 2002 um 10:14:16PM:
> > Eduard, _no_.
> >
> > What part of that don't you understand?
>
> The "wtf no without any GOOD reasons" part.
"We want to actually make a release" is good enough reason fo
#include
Anthony Towns wrote on Sat Apr 06, 2002 um 10:14:16PM:
> On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 02:08:25PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> > > Actually it won't be since vga16 is only modularised in 2.4.
> > Okay, let's make a summary (+ is pro, - is contra):
>
> Eduard, _no_.
>
> What part of that don'
#include
Herbert Xu wrote on Sat Apr 06, 2002 um 08:53:49PM:
> > Enabling VGA16 as a module will be done in the next release.
>
> Actually it won't be since vga16 is only modularised in 2.4.
Okay, let's make a summary (+ is pro, - is contra):
- vanilla (2.2.20)
+ known as stable
- no f
Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Enabling VGA16 as a module will be done in the next release.
Actually it won't be since vga16 is only modularised in 2.4.
--
Debian GNU/Linux 2.2 is out! ( http://www.debian.org/ )
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Home Page: http://gondor
On Fri, Apr 05, 2002 at 10:31:25PM -0800, David Kimdon wrote:
>
> the first CD. Is enabling frame-buffer an option on the vanilla
> flavor? (Herbert, I cc'd you to get your opinion on that, I don't
Enabling VGA16 as a module will be done in the next release.
--
Debian GNU/Linux 2.2 is out! ( h
Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 05:17:57AM +0200 wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 04:06:19AM +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
> > > > > cd1: idepci; cd2 scsi; cd3: bf2.4; cd4: vanilla
> > > I got a second, any opposed?
> > After considering this, I'm opposed.
> > If the decision is that the default boot floppies f
8 matches
Mail list logo