choose-mirror_2.13etch2_amd64.changes ACCEPTED

2008-02-02 Thread Debian Installer
Accepted: choose-mirror-bin_2.13etch2_amd64.udeb to pool/main/c/choose-mirror/choose-mirror-bin_2.13etch2_amd64.udeb choose-mirror_2.13etch2.dsc to pool/main/c/choose-mirror/choose-mirror_2.13etch2.dsc choose-mirror_2.13etch2.tar.gz to

Re: Beta1 missing decisions and possible timeline

2008-02-02 Thread Colin Watson
On Fri, Feb 01, 2008 at 09:51:07PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote: It's far to early to switch d-i to 2.6.24, especially since it drops support for most of /proc/acpi, including the parts used by laptop-detect. I suspect you already know this, but for the record, that's not an intrinsic property of

Bug#388878: marked as done (console-setup-mini: [annoying_notes] Abuse of debconf note(s))

2008-02-02 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Sat, 2 Feb 2008 12:26:21 +0100 with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED] and subject line note templates are now error templates has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now

Bug#388877: marked as done (console-setup: [annoying_notes] Abuse of debconf note(s))

2008-02-02 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Sat, 2 Feb 2008 12:26:21 +0100 with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED] and subject line note templates are now error templates has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now

Processed: reassign 394868 to grub2

2008-02-02 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.26 reassign 394868 grub2 Bug#394868: highpoint/grub conflict detection would be nice Bug reassigned from package `grub-installer' to `grub2'. End of message, stopping processing here.

Re: D-I Manual - String freeze / Call to update translations (deadline: Feb 10)

2008-02-02 Thread Frans Pop
On Saturday 26 January 2008, Frans Pop wrote: So, please update your translations before *Sunday February 10*. Which means there is now one week left! Currently there are 4 translations that are up-to-date: German, French, Russian and Simplified Chinese. After one week, the following are

Re: Installation on NSLU2 does not complete (initramfs nslu2 hook requires user interaction)

2008-02-02 Thread Gordon Farquharson
Hi Joey and Martin On Dec 15, 2007 8:19 AM, Martin Michlmayr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Gordon Farquharson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-12-15 02:13]: if ls -l /sys/class/net/$iface/device | grep -q ixp4xx_mac; then echo firmware in use It does work (I updated the script above to use

Re: No daily cd build

2008-02-02 Thread Frans Pop
On Thursday 31 January 2008, Holger Wansing wrote: About 12 days ago, I changed some message strings according to dhcp-configuring network. The changings _are_transfered_ to the de.po file of netcfg package. But when I download todays daily build of d-i (businesscard or netinst), I see the

Re: Installation on NSLU2 does not complete (initramfs nslu2 hook requires user interaction)

2008-02-02 Thread Joey Hess
Gordon Farquharson wrote: Attached is a patch to the nslu2-utils initramfs nslu2 hook that updates the nslu2-utils package to work with Krzysztof's driver. I have also taken the liberty of adding some logic to the initramfs local-top nslu2 script to remove the module loading message that only

Bug#463483: Install fails on dmraid device but installer claims success!

2008-02-02 Thread Frans Pop
On Thursday 31 January 2008, Chris Carr wrote: I've used recent (late Dec/early Jan) daily builds of Lenny installer images on my dmraid system (Silicon Image 3112A SATA RAID controller), using install dmraid=true. The installation works, including partitioning, but installing grub doesn't.

Re: Installation on NSLU2 does not complete (initramfs nslu2 hook requires user interaction)

2008-02-02 Thread Martin Michlmayr
* Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-02-02 16:16]: I've uploaded with this patch. Is ixp4xx_eth built into the 2.6.24 kernels in unstable? No, it's a module. -- Martin Michlmayr http://www.cyrius.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble?

Re: Beta1 missing decisions and possible timeline

2008-02-02 Thread Otavio Salvador
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Otavio Salvador wrote: We have 2.6.22 as a safe bed on lenny now and their udebs are there too however since EtchAndHalf intends to release with 2.6.24 and it has been uploaded to sid already I'm considering a better option to us to release

Re: Beta1 missing decisions and possible timeline

2008-02-02 Thread Frederik Schueler
Hi, On Fri, Feb 01, 2008 at 09:51:07PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote: It's far to early to switch d-i to 2.6.24, especially since it drops support for most of /proc/acpi, including the parts used by laptop-detect. I still think this switch was an extremely premature and really, really bad idea. We

Re: Beta1 missing decisions and possible timeline

2008-02-02 Thread Frans Pop
On Saturday 02 February 2008, Otavio Salvador wrote: It's far to early to switch d-i to 2.6.24, especially since it drops support for most of /proc/acpi, including the parts used by laptop-detect. I've uploaded laptop-detect with this fixed (using your provided patch) so it is solved on

Re: Beta1 missing decisions and possible timeline

2008-02-02 Thread Frans Pop
On Thursday 31 January 2008, Otavio Salvador wrote: - kernel to release We have 2.6.22 as a safe bed on lenny now and their udebs are there too however since EtchAndHalf intends to release with 2.6.24 and it has been uploaded to sid already I'm considering a better option to us

Re: Beta1 missing decisions and possible timeline

2008-02-02 Thread Frans Pop
On Friday 01 February 2008, dann frazier wrote: Is there anything special we need to add to deal with etch 1/2 kernel metapackages? We were talking about using a name like linux-image-2.6-686-etchnhalf. As I explained in my mails re etch+1/2 some time back [1] , D-I simply will not install

grub (legacy) and e2fsprogs

2008-02-02 Thread Robert Millan
Hi! Please, can you make sure e2fsprogs-udeb = 1.40.5-1 doesn't reach testing before grub 0.97-30 (just uploaded) has? Otherwise D-I builds will fail to boot onto installed system. For details see #463236, #463123. Thanks -- Robert Millan GPLv2 I know my rights; I want my phone call! DRM

Re: Installation on NSLU2 does not complete (initramfs nslu2 hook requires user interaction)

2008-02-02 Thread Joey Hess
Martin Michlmayr wrote: * Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-02-02 16:16]: I've uploaded with this patch. Is ixp4xx_eth built into the 2.6.24 kernels in unstable? No, it's a module. So something still needs to be done to get udev to load it? -- see shy jo signature.asc Description:

Re: Installation on NSLU2 does not complete (initramfs nslu2 hook requires user interaction)

2008-02-02 Thread Gordon Farquharson
Hi Joey On Feb 2, 2008 7:14 PM, Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Martin Michlmayr wrote: * Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-02-02 16:16]: I've uploaded with this patch. Is ixp4xx_eth built into the 2.6.24 kernels in unstable? No, it's a module. So something still needs to be

Bug#463765: debian-installer: Installer offers to install grub bootloader on PowerPC. Why?

2008-02-02 Thread Rick Thomas
Package: debian-installer Severity: normal Using this businesscard install disk: http://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/daily-builds/sid_d-i/arch-latest/powerpc/iso-cd/ Daily build #2 for powerpc, using installer build from sid These images will install the testing version of Debian, currently

Bug#463765: debian-installer: Installer offers to install grub bootloader on PowerPC. Why?

2008-02-02 Thread Rick Thomas
On Feb 2, 2008, at 11:39 PM, Nick Schmalenberger wrote: Grub does exist for powerpc, grub2 http://packages.qa.debian.org/g/grub2.html but as that page says it has an unsatisfiable dependency right now for powerpc so its broken. Has there been any progress on this since:

Re: Beta1 missing decisions and possible timeline

2008-02-02 Thread Christian Perrier
Quoting Frans Pop ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): My conclusion is that unless you are willing to significantly delay the Beta release, I don't see any way you can do the release with 2.6.24. I would suggest to do the release with 2.6.22 and keep the option to do a quick new release based on 2.6.24.