Quoting Joey Hess (jo...@debian.org):
> Does it really make sense for users to use t-p-u? Anything can be
> uploaded there, rejected by the release team, and no upgrade path is
> necessarily provided for a system that installed a package from there
> and ends up tracking stable.
Well, after think
Quoting Otavio Salvador (ota...@ossystems.com.br):
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 7:38 AM, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> > I wonder whether we (in D-I) could add t-p-u to the list of proposed
> > repositories when users install testing. We already propose security
> > and volatile (defaulting
Appears I neglected to copy in the Bug on the follow up to the previous
email and sent a reply direct to christian,
After booting the netboot image, and installing in expert mode using
unstable, Grub
works perfectly, and the install completes without an issue.
Thanks!
On 27 August 2010 01:28, O
Hello,
2010/8/17 abdellah abderazak :
> bon jour
I can't read French so please resend this message in English.
Cheers,
--
Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems
E-mail: ota...@ossystems.com.br http://www.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854 http://projetos.ossystems.com.br
Hello,
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 7:11 PM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
>> * Messy sources.list.udeb will come with non-udeb packages and duplicated
>> udebs; handle those.
>
> I'd tend to think that this might be useful. Thoughts?
I can't think a use case for it.
I tend to agree with Jeremie patch s
Hello Martin,
On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 12:30 PM, Thibaut Girka wrote:
> Here is a patch to do that (works only for the GTA02 for now).
Can you take a look on this?
--
Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems
E-mail: ota...@ossystems.com.br http://www.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 53 9981-7
Hello Thibaut,
On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 12:05 PM, Thibaut GIRKA wrote:
> Package: hw-detect
> Severity: minor
> Tags: patch
>
> For some (well, probably only the Neo FreeRunner), g_ether is automatically
> loaded by the installer, but it isn't loaded by the installed system.
> This patch registers
Hello Keith,
On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 8:11 PM, Keith Ward wrote:
> Thanks for that, I tried running the daily netinst just now , in a virtual
> machine to see what results I could get the previous reported oddities have
> disapeared, however with this netinst I can't complete the install as it
> f
Hello Fabrice,
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 5:49 AM, Fabrice LORRAIN
wrote:
> Package: udhcpd
> Version: 0.9.8cvs20050303-2.1
> Severity: normal
>
> Hello,
>
> Using udhcpd on a multihomed server, it seems not to use the "interface"
> directive
> in udhcpd.conf.
This version is quite old; please tes
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reassign 593812 cups
Bug #593812 [partman-basicmethods] Should warn about reusing existing
partitions for / or /usr
Bug reassigned from package 'partman-basicmethods' to 'cups'.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need as
reassign 593812 cups
thanks
On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 6:22 AM, wrote:
> Now, this bugs is issued always once after the boot. If I restart by invoke-rc
> cupsd restart, no issue occurred.
This has nothing todo with installer and then I am reassigning it to cups.
Please report the issue on the aff
Hello,
On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 7:38 AM, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> I wonder whether we (in D-I) could add t-p-u to the list of proposed
> repositories when users install testing. We already propose security
> and volatile (defaulting to both added): the same mechanism could be
> made for t-p-u wh
Hello,
On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 10:20 AM, Joey Hess wrote:
> Does it really make sense for users to use t-p-u? Anything can be
> uploaded there, rejected by the release team, and no upgrade path is
> necessarily provided for a system that installed a package from there
> and ends up tracking stab
Hello lurr,
Siate prudenti e prendete un momento per leggere il mio messaggio di testo a
voi.
Il mio nome bydi Ella. Ora sono 29 anni.
Il motivo della mia lettera - pqqr il inizio della corrispondenza con voi! Non
ho abbastanza di quella uomo che era sempre al mio fianco.
Io sono donna molto s
Hello,
This is a fixed patch with FJP's comments addressed, I believe.
Frans Pop, le Fri 06 Nov 2009 04:16:39 +0100, a écrit :
> I've looked at the patch from Holger (as that's the most extensive of the
> two), but have some problems with it. My comments below.
>
> Cheers,
> FJP
>
> On Saturday
Quoting Feiran Zheng (famc...@gmail.com):
> Package: os-prober
> Version: 1.38
> Severity: normal
> Tags: patch
>
> The MINIX detection criterial is fairly old, no recent MINIX installation can
> be detected correctly.
> As we are developing some new boot features of MINIX (Multiboot compliant fo
Quoting Jérôme De Greef (jdegr...@gmail.com):
> I confirm this very annoying bug exists since months in unstable.
> Everything (and the way to fix it) is explained here :
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/os-prober/+bug/476625
Thanks for pushing us to look at this. I commit the patch pro
On Thu, 2010-08-26 at 17:48 +1000, Aníbal Monsalve Salazar wrote:
> debian-boot and debian-release,
>
> please hint pciutils/1:3.1.7-5 (has udeb)
Although pciutils has a udeb, it isn't on the list of udeb-producing
packages which need -boot approval before migrating; unblocked.
Regards,
Adam
* David Kalnischkies [2010-08-26 17:43 +0200]:
> Long story short:
> If you want to get updates from an archive only if you pushed a version
> previously from it: 100 => pin > 500.
Wouldn't adding a new field to Release files similar to 'Not-Automatic'
but pin to 101 instead of 1 if this new field
2010/8/26 Paul Wise :
> AFAIK to achieve that you need pinning priorities > 500 and < 1000.
A pin-value >= 100 is enough in this scenario.
> 500 would have maybe even the wrong effect, as repositories
which are not from the default-release - if set at all - get 500 per default
(expect if the Relea
Does it really make sense for users to use t-p-u? Anything can be
uploaded there, rejected by the release team, and no upgrade path is
necessarily provided for a system that installed a package from there
and ends up tracking stable.
--
see shy jo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 10:03:40AM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> [Christian PERRIER]
> > After a (short) discussion in -devel, I came up with the proposal of
> > activating "testing-proposed-updates" when users install testing, in
> > a similar way that we currently propose activating volati
[Christian PERRIER]
> After a (short) discussion in -devel, I came up with the proposal of
> activating "testing-proposed-updates" when users install testing, in
> a similar way that we currently propose activating volatile when
> they install stable.
One challenge that should be considered, is w
debian-boot and debian-release,
please hint pciutils/1:3.1.7-5 (has udeb)
Changes:
pciutils (1:3.1.7-5) unstable; urgency=medium
.
* Update pci.ids with version 2010.08.23
* Fix out-of-date-standards-version
* Fix xc-package-type-in-debian-control
thanks
signature.asc
Description:
Package: apt-setup
Severity: wishlist
After a (short) discussion in -devel, I came up with the proposal of
activating "testing-proposed-updates" when users install testing, in a
similar way that we currently propose activating volatile when they
install stable.
So, sending this as a bug report ag
25 matches
Mail list logo
