-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 10:59:18 -0200
Source: linux-kernel-di-sparc-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-sparc64-di nic-modules-2.6.26-1-sparc64-di
ppp-modules-2.6.26-1-sparc64-di ide-modules-2.6.26-1-sparc64-di
pata-modules-2.6.26-1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 10:11:58 -0200
Source: linux-kernel-di-alpha-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-alpha-generic-di
nic-modules-2.6.26-1-alpha-generic-di
nic-extra-modules-2.6.26-1-alpha-generic-di
nic-wireless-modules-2.6.26-1-alpha
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 10:13:08 -0200
Source: linux-kernel-di-amd64-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-amd64-di nic-modules-2.6.26-1-amd64-di
nic-extra-modules-2.6.26-1-amd64-di nic-wireless-modules-2.6.26-1-amd64-di
nic-shared-modules
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 10:45:37 -0200
Source: linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-iop32x-di nic-modules-2.6.26-1-iop32x-di
ide-modules-2.6.26-1-iop32x-di ide-core-modules-2.6.26-1-iop32x-di
cdrom-core-modules-2.6.26-1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 10:50:46 -0200
Source: linux-kernel-di-ia64-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-itanium-di nic-modules-2.6.26-1-itanium-di
nic-shared-modules-2.6.26-1-itanium-di serial-modules-2.6.26-1-itanium-di
ppp-modules-2.6.26
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 13:07:08 +0100
Source: linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-iop32x-di nic-modules-2.6.26-1-iop32x-di
ide-modules-2.6.26-1-iop32x-di ide-core-modules-2.6.26-1-iop32x-di
cdrom-core-modules-2.6.26-1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 23:32:44 -0600
Source: kernel-package
Binary: kernel-package
Architecture: source all
Version: 11.012
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Manoj Srivastava
On Sat, Nov 01, 2008 at 07:29:16PM -0400, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
| Package: test
| Depends: test-modules | test-source
|
| Package: test-modules
| Depends: linux-image-2.6.26-1-powerpc | linux-image-2.6.26-1-powerpc64
|
| Package: test-source
Both apt and aptitude would always try to
On Sat, Nov 01, 2008 at 09:37:50PM +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
For a really neat and complete solution you'd IMO still need something
like I proposed though to make the vbox ABI visible in package names, but
that can probably be postponed until after Lenny.
Well it is, namely the upstream
space and bandwidth (e.g., a
kernel containing modules that won't work, even if you install every
package in main and contrib). Worse, software that might give the
user the impression that something is going to work (module is loaded,
reports some progress), but then fail pretty much silently
On Sat, Nov 01, 2008 at 07:29:16PM -0400, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
| Package: test
| Depends: test-modules | test-source
|
| Package: test-modules
| Depends: linux-image-2.6.26-1-powerpc | linux-image-2.6.26-1-powerpc64
|
| Package: test-source
Both apt and aptitude would always try to
version of virtualbox. On the other hand
building them with virtualbox-ose makes no sense because vbos is not supposed
to be reupped for each new kernel.
How about adding a new package, virtualbox-ose-modules-2.6, mirroring lme only
for the virtualbox modules? This package could be handled by teh
to be reupped for each new version of virtualbox. On the
other hand building them with virtualbox-ose makes no sense because vbos
is not supposed to be reupped for each new kernel.
Sounds like a good plan. Only disadvantage is that for ABI-changing kernel
updates in stable this will mean one more
sense to me because lme is not
supposed to be reupped for each new version of virtualbox. On the other hand
building them with virtualbox-ose makes no sense because vbos is not supposed
to be reupped for each new kernel.
You are solving problem 2 before problem 1.
I CCed debian-release
Hi folks
Because of some recent events, I thought about the possibility for
packages to depend against kernel module packages. As we don't want to
dictate the usage of Debian provided kernels, we need a last resort
fallback to the modules source.
My first solution was something like
Le jeudi 30 octobre 2008 à 17:37 -0200, Alexandre Oliva a écrit :
It does make a difference when the components don't quite form an
inseparable unit, but rather they're just put together in a single
tarball for convenience.
Kernel modules are not really separable from the kernel image. You can
Hi folks
Because of some recent events, I thought about the possibility for
packages to depend against kernel module packages. As we don't want to
dictate the usage of Debian provided kernels, we need a last resort
fallback to the modules source.
My first solution was something like
Le vendredi 31 octobre 2008 à 12:44 +0100, Bastian Blank a écrit :
Because of some recent events, I thought about the possibility for
packages to depend against kernel module packages. As we don't want to
dictate the usage of Debian provided kernels, we need a last resort
fallback
On Friday 31 October 2008 22:20:26 Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le vendredi 31 octobre 2008 à 12:44 +0100, Bastian Blank a écrit :
Because of some recent events, I thought about the possibility for
packages to depend against kernel module packages. As we don't want to
dictate the usage of Debian
Bastian Blank wrote:
Because of some recent events, I thought about the possibility for
packages to depend against kernel module packages. As we don't want to
dictate the usage of Debian provided kernels, we need a last resort
fallback to the modules source.
Exactly because of the option
-free.
The difference between main and contrib is not at all the same as the
difference between main and non-free.
Because the kernel is perfectly usable without the firmwares.
But how about the specific modules that require them, the ones that
got this sub-thread started in the first place
On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 05:07:44PM +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
Bastian Blank wrote:
Because of some recent events, I thought about the possibility for
packages to depend against kernel module packages. As we don't want to
dictate the usage of Debian provided kernels, we need a last resort
Bastian Blank wrote:
On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 05:07:44PM +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
Exactly because of the option of using custom built kernels, virtualbox
does not depend on the Debian modules packages, but only recommends
them (which IMO is correct: the Debian module package will be installed
Le mercredi 29 octobre 2008 à 22:10 -0200, Alexandre Oliva a écrit :
Because the kernel is perfectly usable without the firmwares.
But how about the specific modules that require them, the ones that
got this sub-thread started in the first place? It doesn't make sense
to me to frame
is Free to modify, and quite often does.
It does make a difference when the components don't quite form an
inseparable unit, but rather they're just put together in a single
tarball for convenience.
Say, Debian splits out the kernel documentation and kernel headers
from the kernel image+modules
them
separately would be just as simple.
Kernel modules *are* plugins, and the Linux build machinery is
designed to enable just this kind of convenient separate building.
I understand that, from a maintenance point of view, it's not so
convenient to keep modules built separately, but hey, Debian's
to run, a
driver for a device is just a nice front end for someone who wants the
device to work. If firmware is required by the device, this would
make the driver in the kernel an accessory to the non-Free program
that runs on the device's CPU.
FTR, Jeff Carr's understanding of the term firmware
[Alexandre Oliva]
Say, if these drivers that require non-Free firmware *were* shipped
as separate packages (for whatever reason), would they really belong
in main, rather than in contrib?
Now you've hit on it. If they were packaged _separately_, the drivers
that are non-functional without
know of such a package, but if there are, that’s fine. Just
unnecessary.
Why should this cleansing not be applied to the kernel, that's
arguably far more important than a number of accessory packages that
undergo this procedure?
Because the kernel is perfectly usable without the firmwares. Since
/debirf
* License : GPLv3
Programming Lang: Bash
Description : Build a kernel and initrd to run Debian from RAM
debirf (DEBian on Initial Ram Filesystem) is a set of tools designed
to create and prepare a kernel and initial ram filesystem that can
run a full-blown Debian environment
Hi again,
I've been watching the discussion and the separation of firmware from
kernel sources with a lot of interest, but today it dawned on me that,
even if this project is completed, it wouldn't quite address the issue
of compliance with Debian procedures and regulations.
I understand main
On Sat, 2008-10-25 at 18:28 -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
Hi again,
I've been watching the discussion and the separation of firmware from
kernel sources with a lot of interest, but today it dawned on me that,
even if this project is completed, it wouldn't quite address the issue
Filipus Klutiero wrote:
It is, but the first team that should approve a Linux upgrade in lenny
is the kernel team. After that the d-i team would be contacted.
Could you just stop handing out bad advice on the development list, please?
The answer to the kernel question is No and there is no use
Le October 19, 2008 04:04:58 am Thomas Viehmann, vous avez écrit :
Filipus Klutiero wrote:
It is, but the first team that should approve a Linux upgrade in lenny
is the kernel team. After that the d-i team would be contacted.
Could you just stop handing out bad advice on the development
On ven, 2008-10-17 at 21:39 -0400, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
For kernel-related discussions, ask on debian-kernel.
And for lenny-related discussions, isn't the release team concerned? :)
It is, but the first team that should approve a Linux upgrade in lenny
is the kernel team. After
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2008 20:53:16 -0500
Source: kernel-package
Binary: kernel-package
Architecture: source all
Version: 11.0011
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Manoj Srivastava
to install firmware.
All (non-free) Debian firmware packages install the firmware files
directly under /lib/firmware, not /lib/firmware/$kernel-version.
And Debian's udev does not consider the kernel-version when looking for
firmware. /lib/udev/hotplug.functions has:
FIRMWARE_DIRS='/lib/firmware /usr
For kernel-related discussions, ask on debian-kernel.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 03:18:41 -0500
Source: kernel-package
Binary: kernel-package
Architecture: source all
Version: 11.0010
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Manoj Srivastava
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 18:38:29 +0200
Source: linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-iop32x-di nic-modules-2.6.26-1-iop32x-di
ide-modules-2.6.26-1-iop32x-di ide-core-modules-2.6.26-1-iop32x-di
cdrom-core-modules-2.6.26-1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 18:38:29 +0200
Source: linux-kernel-di-arm-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-footbridge-di nic-modules-2.6.26-1-footbridge-di
nic-shared-modules-2.6.26-1-footbridge-di ide-modules-2.6.26-1-footbridge-di
cdrom-core
Hi,
considering that Adrian Bunk announced long time support for kernel
2.6.27 (http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/743377) wouldn't it
be a good idea to take kernel 2.6.27 as the stable kernel in lenny?
PJ
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe
On mar, 2008-10-14 at 07:59 +0200, Peter Jordan wrote:
wouldn't it
be a good idea to take kernel 2.6.27 as the stable kernel in lenny?
If we want to release lenny before 2.6.27 is not supported anymore,
maybe it's not?
--
Yves-Alexis
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed
firmware packages install the firmware files
directly under /lib/firmware, not /lib/firmware/$kernel-version.
And Debian's udev does not consider the kernel-version when looking for
firmware. /lib/udev/hotplug.functions has:
FIRMWARE_DIRS='/lib/firmware /usr/local/lib/firmware
/usr/lib/hotplug
upstream recommends to install firmware.
I think where Debian looks for firmware could change. Or people
can use hardlinks.
All (non-free) Debian firmware packages install the firmware files
directly under /lib/firmware, not /lib/firmware/$kernel-version.
Which, of course, has
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 2:38 PM, Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Seems like upstream udev firmware loader does look at
/lib/firmware/$(uname -r)/, which seems sane.
Why was this removed?
It wasn't removed, upstream added that after the version of udev in Debian.
--
that after the version of udev in Debian.
Not Debian. Ubuntu. And it caused quite a fight in LKML, too, which I
won't bother to repeat here.
Basically, there are three choices:
1. Package the firmware as the new kernel-package does (i.e. the Ubuntu way,
which upstream udev now supports).
2. Do
On Tue, 14 Oct 2008, Felipe Sateler wrote:
Please hit me with the cluebat; apparently I'm not understanding
anything. Why would I want to have more than one firmware installed?
AIUI, the firmware is meant to be installed into the hardware and as
such shouldn't be tied to the kernel version
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
This means that if you start installing the same firmware file under
versioned directories, udev will use the first one it finds. Which
will be the one for some $random kernel version and not the one for
the currently running kernel.
This is not a sound argument
Hello Manoj and other Kernel-Maintainers,
Thank you for doing this hard job...
I am ongoing to test the new kernel-package.
Thanks, Greetings and nice Day/Evening
Michelle Konzack
Systemadministrator
24V Electronic Engineer
Tamay Dogan Network
Debian GNU/Linux Consultant
On Tue, 14 Oct 2008, Felipe Sateler wrote:
Please hit me with the cluebat; apparently I'm not understanding anything. Why
would I want to have more than one firmware installed? AIUI, the firmware is
The firmware has an ABI to the kernel driver. If it changes, both have to
change. This has
Paul Wise wrote:
In contrast, the latest upstream udev (130) has this:
FIRMWARE_DIRS=/lib/firmware/$(uname -r) /lib/firmware
From what I've seen on lkml I suspect this has mainly been added because
some distributions _do_ install firmware is versioned subdirs.
Debian currently does not
(non-free) Debian firmware packages install the firmware files
directly under /lib/firmware, not /lib/firmware/$kernel-version.
And Debian's udev does not consider the kernel-version when looking for
firmware. /lib/udev/hotplug.functions has:
FIRMWARE_DIRS='/lib/firmware /usr/local/lib/firmware
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 00:43:18 -0500
Source: kernel-package
Binary: kernel-package
Architecture: source all
Version: 11.008
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Manoj Srivastava
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 01:48:10 -0500
Source: kernel-package
Binary: kernel-package
Architecture: source all
Version: 11.009
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Manoj Srivastava
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 09:12:21 -0300
Source: linux-kernel-di-alpha-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-alpha-generic-di
nic-modules-2.6.26-1-alpha-generic-di
nic-extra-modules-2.6.26-1-alpha-generic-di
nic-wireless-modules-2.6.26-1-alpha
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 09:20:28 -0300
Source: linux-kernel-di-arm-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-footbridge-di nic-modules-2.6.26-1-footbridge-di
nic-shared-modules-2.6.26-1-footbridge-di ide-modules-2.6.26-1-footbridge-di
cdrom-core
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 09:29:06 -0300
Source: linux-kernel-di-hppa-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-parisc-di nic-modules-2.6.26-1-parisc-di
ppp-modules-2.6.26-1-parisc-di ide-modules-2.6.26-1-parisc-di
cdrom-core-modules-2.6.26-1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 09:27:24 -0300
Source: linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-iop32x-di nic-modules-2.6.26-1-iop32x-di
ide-modules-2.6.26-1-iop32x-di ide-core-modules-2.6.26-1-iop32x-di
cdrom-core-modules-2.6.26-1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 09:13:35 -0300
Source: linux-kernel-di-amd64-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-amd64-di nic-modules-2.6.26-1-amd64-di
nic-extra-modules-2.6.26-1-amd64-di nic-wireless-modules-2.6.26-1-amd64-di
nic-shared-modules
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 09:50:02 -0300
Source: linux-kernel-di-mips-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-r4k-ip22-di loop-modules-2.6.26-1-r4k-ip22-di
ipv6-modules-2.6.26-1-r4k-ip22-di jfs-modules-2.6.26-1-r4k-ip22-di
reiserfs-modules-2.6.26
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 09:55:42 -0300
Source: linux-kernel-di-sparc-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-sparc64-di nic-modules-2.6.26-1-sparc64-di
ppp-modules-2.6.26-1-sparc64-di ide-modules-2.6.26-1-sparc64-di
pata-modules-2.6.26-1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 09:55:23 -0300
Source: linux-kernel-di-s390-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-s390-di nic-modules-2.6.26-1-s390-di
scsi-core-modules-2.6.26-1-s390-di scsi-modules-2.6.26-1-s390-di
ext2-modules-2.6.26-1-s390-di ext3
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 09:37:27 -0300
Source: linux-kernel-di-ia64-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-itanium-di nic-modules-2.6.26-1-itanium-di
nic-shared-modules-2.6.26-1-itanium-di serial-modules-2.6.26-1-itanium-di
ppp-modules-2.6.26
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 20:07:33 -0300
Source: linux-kernel-di-mipsel-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-sb1-bcm91250a-di
ppp-modules-2.6.26-1-sb1-bcm91250a-di ide-modules-2.6.26-1-sb1-bcm91250a-di
cdrom-core-modules-2.6.26-1-sb1-bcm91250a
On Fri, 10 Oct 2008, Manoj Srivastava engaged keyboard and shared this with us
all:
--} Hi folks,
--}
--} A new version of kernel-package has made its way to unstable.
--} This is a extensive change, and addresses most of the problems that
--} have been plaguing kernel-package
identical
manpages installed, which seems like a waste.
It would be not that usefull as the kernel team wants to split the
complete image maintainer scripts into its own package anyway. And
having one package which just a manpage is not nice for the archive.
Bastian
--
Dismissed. That's a Star Fleet
Hi folks,
A new version of kernel-package has made its way to unstable.
This is a extensive change, and addresses most of the problems that
have been plaguing kernel-package, partially thanks to patches provided
by other folk.
The new version works with the merged x86 code
Hi,
Be sure to get kernel-package_11.005_all.deb. The 11.005 fixes a
critical regression, born of a copypaste error from late night
hacking. Sorry for the inconvenience.
manoj
--
Spence's Admonition: Never stow away on a kamikaze plane.
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED
Hi,
The kernel images produced by kernel package all obey the
directives in /etc/kernel-img.conf, for example, to trigger
lilo/grub. Currently, users only get to see the man page if they happen
to have the 'kernel-package' package installed. As Bug#373872 shows,
even official kernel
This one time, at band camp, Manoj Srivastava said:
I can go either route. Comments?
I'd say a -common package makes the most sense to me. The other way
seems like you could conceivably end up with several roughly identical
manpages installed, which seems like a waste.
--
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2008 00:31:31 -0500
Source: kernel-package
Binary: kernel-package
Architecture: source all
Version: 11.003
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: high
Maintainer: Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Manoj Srivastava
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2008 09:18:38 -0500
Source: kernel-package
Binary: kernel-package
Architecture: source all
Version: 11.005
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: critical
Maintainer: Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Manoj
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2008 02:47:49 -0500
Source: kernel-package
Binary: kernel-package
Architecture: source all
Version: 11.004
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: high
Maintainer: Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Manoj Srivastava
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2008 12:02:00 -0500
Source: kernel-package
Binary: kernel-package
Architecture: source all
Version: 11.006
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: high
Maintainer: Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Manoj Srivastava
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2008 16:05:03 -0500
Source: kernel-package
Binary: kernel-package
Architecture: source all
Version: 11.007
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Manoj Srivastava
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2008 19:09:20 +1030
Source: cpad-kernel
Binary: cpad-kernel-source cpad-common cpad-kernel-dev
Architecture: source all
Version: 0.10-6
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Ron Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2008 23:49:52 -0500
Source: kernel-package
Binary: kernel-package
Architecture: source all
Version: 11.002
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: high
Maintainer: Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Manoj Srivastava
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 04 Oct 2008 12:19:45 -0300
Source: linux-kernel-di-alpha-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-alpha-generic-di
nic-modules-2.6.26-1-alpha-generic-di
nic-extra-modules-2.6.26-1-alpha-generic-di
nic-wireless-modules-2.6.26-1-alpha
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 04 Oct 2008 14:34:00 -0300
Source: linux-kernel-di-mips-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-r4k-ip22-di loop-modules-2.6.26-1-r4k-ip22-di
ipv6-modules-2.6.26-1-r4k-ip22-di jfs-modules-2.6.26-1-r4k-ip22-di
reiserfs-modules-2.6.26
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 04 Oct 2008 14:14:20 -0300
Source: linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-iop32x-di nic-modules-2.6.26-1-iop32x-di
ide-modules-2.6.26-1-iop32x-di ide-core-modules-2.6.26-1-iop32x-di
cdrom-core-modules-2.6.26-1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 04 Oct 2008 12:35:41 -0300
Source: linux-kernel-di-arm-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-footbridge-di nic-modules-2.6.26-1-footbridge-di
nic-shared-modules-2.6.26-1-footbridge-di ide-modules-2.6.26-1-footbridge-di
cdrom-core
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 04 Oct 2008 14:19:05 -0300
Source: linux-kernel-di-hppa-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-parisc-di nic-modules-2.6.26-1-parisc-di
ppp-modules-2.6.26-1-parisc-di ide-modules-2.6.26-1-parisc-di
cdrom-core-modules-2.6.26-1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 04 Oct 2008 12:25:22 -0300
Source: linux-kernel-di-amd64-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-amd64-di nic-modules-2.6.26-1-amd64-di
nic-extra-modules-2.6.26-1-amd64-di nic-wireless-modules-2.6.26-1-amd64-di
nic-shared-modules
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 04 Oct 2008 14:23:30 -0300
Source: linux-kernel-di-ia64-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-itanium-di nic-modules-2.6.26-1-itanium-di
nic-shared-modules-2.6.26-1-itanium-di serial-modules-2.6.26-1-itanium-di
ppp-modules-2.6.26
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 04 Oct 2008 16:48:38 -0300
Source: linux-kernel-di-mipsel-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-sb1-bcm91250a-di
ppp-modules-2.6.26-1-sb1-bcm91250a-di ide-modules-2.6.26-1-sb1-bcm91250a-di
cdrom-core-modules-2.6.26-1-sb1-bcm91250a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 04 Oct 2008 15:35:26 -0300
Source: linux-kernel-di-s390-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-s390-di nic-modules-2.6.26-1-s390-di
scsi-core-modules-2.6.26-1-s390-di scsi-modules-2.6.26-1-s390-di
ext2-modules-2.6.26-1-s390-di ext3
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 04 Oct 2008 15:37:02 -0300
Source: linux-kernel-di-sparc-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-sparc64-di nic-modules-2.6.26-1-sparc64-di
ppp-modules-2.6.26-1-sparc64-di ide-modules-2.6.26-1-sparc64-di
pata-modules-2.6.26-1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 19:45:35 -0300
Source: linux-kernel-di-amd64-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-amd64-di nic-modules-2.6.26-1-amd64-di
nic-extra-modules-2.6.26-1-amd64-di nic-wireless-modules-2.6.26-1-amd64-di
nic-shared-modules
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 19:32:28 -0300
Source: kernel-wedge
Binary: kernel-wedge
Architecture: source all
Version: 2.52
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian Install System Team [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Otavio Salvador
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 19:42:29 -0300
Source: linux-kernel-di-alpha-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-alpha-generic-di
nic-modules-2.6.26-1-alpha-generic-di
nic-extra-modules-2.6.26-1-alpha-generic-di
nic-wireless-modules-2.6.26-1-alpha
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 19:56:47 -0300
Source: linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-iop32x-di nic-modules-2.6.26-1-iop32x-di
ide-modules-2.6.26-1-iop32x-di ide-core-modules-2.6.26-1-iop32x-di
cdrom-core-modules-2.6.26-1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 20:11:41 -0300
Source: linux-kernel-di-ia64-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-itanium-di nic-modules-2.6.26-1-itanium-di
nic-shared-modules-2.6.26-1-itanium-di serial-modules-2.6.26-1-itanium-di
ppp-modules-2.6.26
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 20:01:18 -0300
Source: linux-kernel-di-hppa-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-parisc-di nic-modules-2.6.26-1-parisc-di
ppp-modules-2.6.26-1-parisc-di ide-modules-2.6.26-1-parisc-di
cdrom-core-modules-2.6.26-1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 19:51:13 -0300
Source: linux-kernel-di-arm-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-footbridge-di nic-modules-2.6.26-1-footbridge-di
nic-shared-modules-2.6.26-1-footbridge-di ide-modules-2.6.26-1-footbridge-di
cdrom-core
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 20:21:23 -0300
Source: linux-kernel-di-mips-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-r4k-ip22-di loop-modules-2.6.26-1-r4k-ip22-di
ipv6-modules-2.6.26-1-r4k-ip22-di jfs-modules-2.6.26-1-r4k-ip22-di
reiserfs-modules-2.6.26
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 20:31:03 -0300
Source: linux-kernel-di-s390-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-s390-di nic-modules-2.6.26-1-s390-di
scsi-core-modules-2.6.26-1-s390-di scsi-modules-2.6.26-1-s390-di
ext2-modules-2.6.26-1-s390-di ext3
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 05:29:36 +0200
Source: flash-kernel
Binary: flash-kernel flash-kernel-installer
Architecture: source armel
Version: 2.11
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian Install System Team [EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2008 15:03:59 -0300
Source: linux-kernel-di-s390-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-s390-di nic-modules-2.6.26-1-s390-di
scsi-core-modules-2.6.26-1-s390-di scsi-modules-2.6.26-1-s390-di
ext2-modules-2.6.26-1-s390-di ext3
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 15:18:24 +
Source: linux-kernel-di-m68k-2.6
Binary: kernel-image-2.6.26-1-amiga-di nic-shared-modules-2.6.26-1-amiga-di
ppp-modules-2.6.26-1-amiga-di cdrom-core-modules-2.6.26-1-amiga-di
scsi-modules-2.6.26-1
1301 - 1400 of 5759 matches
Mail list logo
