Maks,
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 10:51:04PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
> even more if it is loop-aes which show a long history of
> hostily of the module owner versus linux-2.6 upstream.
That's not true.
There are several reasons why loop-AES has not been merged
upstream, and has very little
Hi release team,
please unblock loop-aes-utils 2.13.1-4; the only change in -4
is an RC bugfix. CCing -boot because it includes an udeb.
Max
> Closes: 495682
> Changes:
> loop-aes-utils (2.13.1-4) unstable; urgency=low
> .
>* patches/losetup_add_option_f.dpatch:
> - Added to
Hi release team,
can you please approve loop-aes 3.2b-1lenny1 in t-p-u?
This basically resurrects 3.1b-2 (which was previously
in testing) for d-i beta1 -
loop-aes (3.2b-1lenny1) testing; urgency=low
.
* Resurrect modules for 2.6.22-3.
.
* This package was previously removed from testi
Hi release team,
please unblock loop-aes-utils 2.13-2 (frozen due to udeb)
provided that d-i RMs agree. I think it should be safe
because mount-aes-udeb is not included in any initrds.
Max
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
Hi Sven,
On Sun, Dec 17, 2006 at 01:53:36PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> Why is loop-aes not part of the official module packages ?
Mostly because we have not yet found the time to complete the
integration. Note that the package uses linux-support-$KVERS, so
it is already easy to rebuild for ABI
Hi all,
On Sun, Dec 17, 2006 at 02:43:57AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 15, 2006 at 06:08:08PM +0100, Frederik Schueler wrote:
> > This update bears 3 ABI breaking changes. While the vserver patch might
> > be adaptable, the PAE migration of i386 Xen is not. But we need this
> > chan
x27;t include
+the initramfs-tools integration yet for etch.
+
+ -- Max Vozeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sat, 16 Dec 2006 03:38:40 +0100
+
loop-aes-utils (2.12r-14) unstable; urgency=low
* Sync with util-linux 2.12r-11
diff -u loop-aes-utils-2.12r/debian/control loop-aes-utils-2.12r/deb
On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 08:21:53PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Saturday 24 June 2006 19:53, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > Disadvantages:
>
> Another potential disadvantage could be that one binary forces all users
> that need/want only one (related set) of those modules to install all of
> them.
An
Hi release managers,
please unblock loop-aes-utils 2.12r-11. Its frozen due to
building an udeb that is ATM only used in daily builds of
debian-installer from unstable.
cheers,
Max
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi release managers,
please hint loop-aes-utils 2.12r-6 to enter testing when it's
old enough. It's frozen due to a udeb that is not used in
debian-installer.
cheers,
Max
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The package is held back because it builds an udeb (which is not
used in debian-installer so far). Please hint it so that it can
enter testing.
cheers,
Max
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 02:08:32AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 03:54:34AM +0200, Max Vozeler wrote:
>
> > The current version has been in unstable for 47 days with no bugs
> > reported against it, and for above reasons, I would like to ask you
&g
Hi release team,
I just noticed that util-linux 2.12p-4 is now in testing - somewhat
unexpectedly for me, since the last discussion on -release seemed to
conclude that updating it was out of question.
loop-aes-utils 2.12p-4 has been held out of testing as it depends
on versions of mount (>=2.12p-
13 matches
Mail list logo
