Mathew Binkley wrote:
I have been downloading cd images from:
http://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/weekly-builds/powerpc/
because that's where the Debian website says to get them. None of the
images have worked for me because the installer has not been fixed.
As I have already said in
Rick Thomas wrote:
The result is that now there's a very subtle release critical bug
(#404876) and no time to fix it.
Well, the release of etch is currently delayed due to the currently 95
open release critical bugs, of which #404876 is one. I don't see any
indication that the bug's not being
Charles Plessy wrote:
How about releasing a RC1.5, then, with a 2.6.18 as similar as possible
as the one forecasted in testing ?
Etch d-i installs etch; without forcing such a release to install
unstable, it would not be possible to use the 2.6.18 kernel currently in
unstable. If we point d-i
Le Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 10:35:52AM -0500, Joey Hess a écrit :
Charles Plessy wrote:
How about releasing a RC1.5, then, with a 2.6.18 as similar as possible
as the one forecasted in testing ?
There are of course all kinds of ways to hack around this, but all of
them are suboptimal. For
From: Christian Perrier [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and certainly can't expect to have everything run like a charm,
especially with very special hardware like the one you described in
the mail that started this thread.
It's not very special hardware. It's a bunch of IBM JS20 blades
configured as a
On Jan 16, 2007, at 8:46 PM, Mathew Binkley wrote:
As I said earlier, there shouldn't be an arbitrary line between the
installer and the packages. People aren't installing Etch the
installer or Etch the packages, they're installing Etch the
release. Test both parts simultaneously, as a
Mat has an important point here. Too often, I've seen: I'm sorry
about the bugs you've encountered post-install. It sounds like the
install itself went fine. I'm closing this report. Usually, the
person making the report doesn't have a clue about the fine points of
which package
Le Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 07:14:22AM +0100, Christian Perrier a écrit :
Actually, it's equally frustrating for all of us that we *can't*
release a new D-I despite the team plan to release RC2 a few weeks
after RC1.
We can't do this because the 2.6.18 kernel is not in testing.
Hi all,
How
On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 07:14:22AM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote:
Actually, it's equally frustrating for all of us that we *can't*
release a new D-I despite the team plan to release RC2 a few weeks
after RC1.
We can't do this because the 2.6.18 kernel is not in testing.
To be precise,
Christian Perrier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can you give us examples of actions from the D-I team who could be
used as illustrations of negligence towards the powerpc architecture
users?
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It has already been explained that the bug at issue here has not
On Jan 15, 2007, at 12:39 AM, Christian Perrier wrote:
Quoting Rick Thomas ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
It's sad to see d-i on powerpc, a major architectural variant, being
eroded and neglected as a result of a few people who can't get past
their own personal animosity to Sven. Whatever his merits
Can you give us examples of actions from the D-I team who could be
used as illustrations of negligence towards the powerpc architecture
users?
Well, OK:
The one that particularly got to me was the very long dry spell for
OldWorld PowerMacs during which etch would not boot on that
Right about now, I'm expecting several people to chime in we've fixed
the problem already on our installers, and you're an idiot, just go here
to get it. I, and probably most of humanity with a job and a life,
don't have time to dig through the entire website. When we see a link
on the
On Sun, Jan 14, 2007 at 12:08:37AM -0500, Clyde E. Kunkel wrote:
Geert Stappers wrote:
snip
A more constructive way of solving the greater issue,
could have be done by asking in november a question like
Bug #391451, about a kernel module, is reported as fixed.
What is needed to get in
It's sad to see d-i on powerpc, a major architectural variant, being
eroded and neglected as a result of a few people who can't get past
their own personal animosity to Sven. Whatever his merits or
demerits -- and I'm not going to get drawn into a debate on that
topic -- the powerpc
Quoting Rick Thomas ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
It's sad to see d-i on powerpc, a major architectural variant, being
eroded and neglected as a result of a few people who can't get past
their own personal animosity to Sven. Whatever his merits or
demerits -- and I'm not going to get drawn
Hi,
On Saturday 13 January 2007 08:47, Joey Hess wrote:
Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
Yes, I've seen various mails/rants etc... and haven't wanted to take
part of it neither in the past, but it looks like this has gone too far,
and it's more and more looking like even perfectly good bug
On 13 Jan 2007, at 08:49, Holger Levsen wrote:
[...]
I dont think _this_ thread is the cause for Bens perception, rather
those
threads which _started_ with these mails (and others):
http://lists.debian.org/debian-powerpc/2006/04/msg00407.html
On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 01:06:08PM +, Arnaud Delobelle wrote:
AFAIK Sven Luther has not contributed to this thread and seems to be
banned from posting on debian lists. Thus it strikes me that to bring
Sven hasn't been banned, he decided of his own accord to take a break
for two months:
On 13 Jan 2007, at 14:47, Mark Brown wrote:
[...]
Sven hasn't been banned, he decided of his own accord to take a break
for two months:
[...]
OK so can't everyone decide of their own accord to give him a break
for these two months?
--
Arnaud Delobelle
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
Op 11-01-2007 om 13:24 schreef Mathew Binkley:
Frans Pop wrote:
Since the bug report hasn't changed since my initial bug report, you may
try that. Those blades are now running RHEL 5. Debian lost its
opportunity.
Mathew Binkley filed bugreport #391451 on friday october 6th 2006.
On monday
Geert Stappers wrote:
snip
A more constructive way of solving the greater issue,
could have be done by asking in november a question like
Bug #391451, about a kernel module, is reported as fixed.
What is needed to get in the Debian installer?
snip
One should lead to another, assuming
Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
Yes, I've seen various mails/rants etc... and haven't wanted to take
part of it neither in the past, but it looks like this has gone too far,
and it's more and more looking like even perfectly good bug fixes that
are needed for most users are being rejected on the
What I am interested in, as a long-time Debian user, is solving the
greater issue of real-world Debian problems not being solved because
some developers have raging egos and can't get along.
You're right about that issue.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Christian Perrier wrote:
What I am interested in, as a long-time Debian user, is solving the
greater issue of real-world Debian problems not being solved because
some developers have raging egos and can't get along.
You're right about that issue.
Except that there's been zero evidence in
Greetings. I am the senior system administrator at Vanderbilt
University's supercomputing center. We operate a 1500 processor cluster
for researchers at Vanderbilt.
Our current cluster is divided between 840 Intel/AMD x86 processors, and
672 IBM PowerPC 970FX processors. To date, we have
On Thursday 11 January 2007 18:40, Mathew Binkley wrote:
Our current cluster is divided between 840 Intel/AMD x86 processors,
and 672 IBM PowerPC 970FX processors. To date, we have required
different operating systems on each architecture because of poor OS
support for the PowerPC's.
Etch
Allow me to correct myself on some minor points.
On Thursday 11 January 2007 19:18, Frans Pop wrote:
The daily build Etch images have been using this udeb for a bit more
than a month.
It was even a bit longer: installer images have included the module since
about Nov 20.
The delay in
Frans Pop wrote:
Please check your facts before sending such mails:
I did, by downloading the latest Debian Etch testing iso (which was
regenerated on January 8, three days ago) and it failed at exactly the
same place, with exactly the same error.
I did not send my previous email (nor this
On Thursday 11 January 2007 19:29, Mathew Binkley wrote:
I did, by downloading the latest Debian Etch testing iso (which was
regenerated on January 8, three days ago) and it failed at exactly the
same place, with exactly the same error.
And we are supposed to guess that by telepathic means or
On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 07:18:24PM +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
[...]
False: it was not compiled into the standard Debian kernel. The installer
does not use custom kernels. This was explained to you at the time.
[...]
Please check your facts before sending such mails:
[...]
I'll ignore the rest
Frans Pop wrote:
And we are supposed to guess that by telepathic means or something?
No. However, if the bug wasn't fixed when I asked in September and
October, it won't magically vanish in the intervening time.
Please file a new installation report [1] including (gzipped!)
Since the bug
Mathew Binkley wrote:
I did, by downloading the latest Debian Etch testing iso (which was
regenerated on January 8, three days ago)
By that date I can intuit that you downloaded a full size CD image, all
of which still have the rc1 installer on them. If you had wanted to get
a newer version of
Eric Cooper wrote:
On the contrary, he attacked nobody personally, and his tone was not
inflammatory.
Sorry, but you have failed us is both a personal attack, and infalmatory.
Much of the rest of Eric's mails were as well. I don't have a problem with
Frans's responses.
Your response made an
Joey Hess wrote:
Much of the rest of Eric's mails were as well.
Er, of course I was confusing Eric Cooper with Mathew Binkley.
Apologies.
--
see shy jo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Thu, 2007-01-11 at 11:40 -0600, Mathew Binkley wrote:
Greetings. I am the senior system administrator at Vanderbilt
University's supercomputing center. We operate a 1500 processor cluster
for researchers at Vanderbilt.
Our current cluster is divided between 840 Intel/AMD x86 processors,
36 matches
Mail list logo
