On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 06:35:08AM +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 10:39:55PM -0600, David Wright wrote:
> > On Tue 12 Dec 2023 at 23:05:49 (-0500), Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > > > Well, the machine in question has a wi-fi but I don't plan on using it.
> > > > Though unless I
On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 10:39:55PM -0600, David Wright wrote:
> On Tue 12 Dec 2023 at 23:05:49 (-0500), Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > > Well, the machine in question has a wi-fi but I don't plan on using it.
> > > Though unless I'm misunderstanding, just having a wi-fi (used or not) is
> > > enough to
Can anyone please explain:
1. Why upgrades of stable into a potentially seriously compromised state were
allowed to continue, twice, rather than pulling the upgrades? or...
2. Why the best temporary solution isn't to revert the kernel to the last known
good version so upgrades-other-than-kernel
On Tue 12 Dec 2023 at 23:05:49 (-0500), Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > Well, the machine in question has a wi-fi but I don't plan on using it.
> > Though unless I'm misunderstanding, just having a wi-fi (used or not) is
> > enough to trigger the bug. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
>
> "the bug"?
>
>
> Well, the machine in question has a wi-fi but I don't plan on using it.
> Though unless I'm misunderstanding, just having a wi-fi (used or not) is
> enough to trigger the bug. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
"the bug"?
What's this bug you're referring to?
Stefan
5 matches
Mail list logo
