On Mon, Nov 27, 2006 at 11:46:46AM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
Sven Luther writes (Re: Renewed appeal to the technical committee about the
FransAndCo.Vs.Sven dispute):
Well, i base this bias on the mails you wrote where you fully sided
with frans in this issue, and against me. I think you did
On Sat, Nov 25, 2006 at 06:19:33AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Fri, Nov 24, 2006 at 12:14:41PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
Of the other members, believe both Steve Langasek, and Anthony Towns have
showed clear uncomprehension and one-sidedness about this issue, and i am
not
sure
Hello,
== Introduction ==
6 Month ago i already had contacted the tech comitte in hope that the current
mess between frans and a few other members of the d-i team and me can be
solved. The tech comitte refused a ruling on this issue.
We are many months later, and the issue is not even near to
not be
something that will be releasable as part of etch, but would live at the
fringes of it, until a better integration may be possible at the etch+1 stage.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, May 15, 2006 at 12:45:32PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
Sven Luther writes (Bug#366938: svn commit access to the d-i repo ...):
As i startedto reply to Ian yesterday, no, i won't start a GR as is [...]
`As is' ?
Oh, well, don't remember, some bad cutpaste again :/
I am not sure
On Mon, May 15, 2006 at 12:45:32PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
Sven Luther writes (Bug#366938: svn commit access to the d-i repo ...):
As i startedto reply to Ian yesterday, no, i won't start a GR as is [...]
Ian, ...
For some reason i cannot reply to you privately, your mail setup is probably
. This is in reality the question i ask, if this is not going to be
what you are judging on, let's better drop the issue, i had no intentions of
bringing the social warfar here.
Friendly (maybe ?),
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
on it ? And
this i believe is an almost unpardonable issue.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
solved.
Notice that i asked the DPL to give some guarantee that if i make effort to
behave, i will not get this same threatment from you and others next time i
dare give a technical opinion which you don't like.
Hurt,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject
and our users
in mind.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, May 12, 2006 at 01:58:52PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Fri, May 12, 2006 at 10:38:58AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
Ok, this is an attemtp to statuate on the problematic which has been
opposing me and the d-i team on the subject of the commit access to the
d-i repository
remove those hacks, include a mention of the
broken kernels in the README file, and maybe propose a fixed yaird to
stable-proposed-updates or something.
Alternatively, we could propose a fixed kenrel to stable-proposed-update which
removes the herbert-xu modular ide patch.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 09:12:42AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 12:00:50AM -0800, Jurij Smakov wrote:
When ide-generic is included (it is loaded after all the native ide
modules), the kernel boots fine. The reason is that in the Debian
2.6.8 sources the ide-generic
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 12:40:26AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 08:10:12AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
I've done a little poking of my own at sysfs based on the comments in
the yaird code. I can confirm that it is possible for a PCI IDE driver
to be listed
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 01:10:27AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 09:49:18AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
Mmm. When this was happening, could you use and mount partition on this
device ?
And when doing so, do you know which of ide-generic or cmd64x would
problems with
2.6.14-5, however, so I suspect either both changelog entries are wrong
or there's more to it than the modular-ide patch.
If the patch was droped in 2.6.14-6, and you had problems with 2.6.14-5, then
this is perfectly normal, no ? Or am i missing something ?
Friendly,
Sven Luther
of the driver working
without it.
And will you be able to fix it then ? Will you back out the ide-generic patch
that was introduced in 0.0.12 ? What are your real intentions about this ?
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble
On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 12:38:55PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
Sven Luther writes (Bug#345067: [Yaird-devel] Re: Bug#345067: ide-generic on
poweprc):
[ a mixture of technical comments and egregious ranting ]
Sven, I am very disappointed that even after we have repeatedly asked
you
On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 08:08:04PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 11:08:33AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
Steve, what is the interest of doing this ? We only have 2.6.15 currently in
sid/etch, and sarge uses 2.6.8 together with initrd-tool, so it is a
non-issue
hope to get a bit more credit when i say
things like that in the future.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 10:31:06PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
On Tue, 7 Mar 2006 10:53:58 +0100
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It has been over 2 month now since this bug was first
On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 12:08:00AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
Dear technical comittee members, ..
First excuses for me going over the border yesterday, but as you will see the
problem was as i first voiced it somewhen in november/december, and it is a
bit difficult to handle this kind
, in response to Sven Luther:
The ide-generic module is not built on powerpc,
In the _current_ _official_ kernel package in Debian, or in any
sysfs-supporting powerpc Linux kernel ever, locally built or not?
seems to be the important question; and I gather the answer is that the
official
On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 12:14:38AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 02:15:56PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
I am severly disapointed with you, and you are a liar by claiming that i
Sven, there is no need to call anyone a liar.
Well, he is lying about this, he refused
On Mon, Aug 05, 2002 at 10:37:13AM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
Previously Sven LUTHER wrote:
That is not comparable, X4.2 is still not in unstable because Branden
did work on 4.1 until months after 4.2 was released. This is one of the
things that gives us a reputation of releasing
24 matches
Mail list logo
