Heyho,
Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> - lids-2.2
Can definitely be removed since I am thinking about orphaning the lids
packages at all. But you'll hear from me about that.
david
--
|David Spreen | Debian GNU Developer |
|Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 2004-03-23 at 16:06, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 03:56:05PM -0500, Camm Maguire wrote:
> > Greetings! Pardon my ignorance, but are the raid and SSE patches
> > already backported into 2.2.25? I'm assuming Debian will continue to
> > offer the 2.2 series. If so, and if .2
[huge CC list removed]
On Wed, Mar 24, 2004 at 12:07:27AM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 03:23:42PM -0600, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 10:06:15PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 03:56:05PM -0500, Camm Maguire wrote:
> > > > Gree
On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 03:23:42PM -0600, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 10:06:15PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 03:56:05PM -0500, Camm Maguire wrote:
> > > Greetings! Pardon my ignorance, but are the raid and SSE patches
> > > already backported into 2
On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 03:56:05PM -0500, Camm Maguire wrote:
> Greetings! Pardon my ignorance, but are the raid and SSE patches
> already backported into 2.2.25? I'm assuming Debian will continue to
> offer the 2.2 series. If so, and if .25 doesn't already contain them,
> the raid and SSE patch
On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 10:06:15PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 03:56:05PM -0500, Camm Maguire wrote:
> > Greetings! Pardon my ignorance, but are the raid and SSE patches
> > already backported into 2.2.25? I'm assuming Debian will continue to
> > offer the 2.2 series. If
Greetings! Pardon my ignorance, but are the raid and SSE patches
already backported into 2.2.25? I'm assuming Debian will continue to
offer the 2.2 series. If so, and if .25 doesn't already contain them,
the raid and SSE patches are important, I think -- the vm-global much
less so. I can update
On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 06:38:58PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> [ I've Cc'ed all maintainers of affected packages. ]
>
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 09:10:09AM -0600, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 21, 2004 at 03:37:24AM +0100, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
> >...
> > > It depends on the subarchitectu
On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 06:38:58PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> Below is a list of kernel 2.2 packages (by source package) and packages
> (build-)depending on them.
Leave all of these.
> m68k:
> - kernel-image-2.2.25-amiga
> - kernel-image-2.2.25-atari
> - kernel-image-2.2.25-bvme6000
> - kerne
> To my current knowledge, all of them can be removed with the following
> exceptions:
> - kernel-image-2.2.25-mac
> - kernel-image-2.2.25-mac-udeb
> - kernel-patch-2.2.25-m68k
> - kernel-source-2.2.25
You can't remove the sparc ones. 2.2 is the only thing that runs stable
on sparc32's (all sparc
[ I've Cc'ed all maintainers of affected packages. ]
On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 09:10:09AM -0600, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 21, 2004 at 03:37:24AM +0100, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
>...
> > It depends on the subarchitecture. In the installer, m68k-amiga uses
> > 2.4.20, m68k-mac uses 2.2.25.
>
On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 06:38:58PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> [ I've Cc'ed all maintainers of affected packages. ]
>
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 09:10:09AM -0600, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 21, 2004 at 03:37:24AM +0100, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
> >...
> > > It depends on the subarchitectu
12 matches
Mail list logo
