On 10/30/07, Jordan Crouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 30/10/07 03:24 +0100, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
An important issue will be to get the code compiling. I was not
successful doing so due to the old ld overlapping sections friend.
We've seen this before - Whats happening here is that the
On 11/1/07, Myles Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/30/07, Jordan Crouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 30/10/07 03:24 +0100, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
An important issue will be to get the code compiling. I was not
successful doing so due to the old ld overlapping sections friend.
On 30/10/07 03:24 +0100, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
An important issue will be to get the code compiling. I was not
successful doing so due to the old ld overlapping sections friend.
We've seen this before - Whats happening here is that the ld script
snippet for .id is going into the ld script
* Jordan Crouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] [071030 18:03]:
On 30/10/07 03:24 +0100, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
An important issue will be to get the code compiling. I was not
successful doing so due to the old ld overlapping sections friend.
We've seen this before - Whats happening here is that the ld
* Jordan Crouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] [071030 18:03]:
We've seen this before - Whats happening here is that the ld script
snippet for .id is going into the ld script after the snippet for .reset,
so to LD, the current pointer appears to jump backwards, and it can't figure
out the math correctly.
On 30/10/07 18:07 +0100, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
* Jordan Crouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] [071030 18:03]:
On 30/10/07 03:24 +0100, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
An important issue will be to get the code compiling. I was not
successful doing so due to the old ld overlapping sections friend.
We've
On 30/10/07 18:07 +0100, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
* Jordan Crouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] [071030 18:03]:
We've seen this before - Whats happening here is that the ld script
snippet for .id is going into the ld script after the snippet for .reset,
so to LD, the current pointer appears to jump
On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 06:07:09PM +0100, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
* Jordan Crouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] [071030 18:03]:
On 30/10/07 03:24 +0100, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
An important issue will be to get the code compiling. I was not
successful doing so due to the old ld overlapping sections
On 30/10/07 18:14 +0100, Uwe Hermann wrote:
On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 06:07:09PM +0100, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
* Jordan Crouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] [071030 18:03]:
On 30/10/07 03:24 +0100, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
An important issue will be to get the code compiling. I was not
successful
Jordan Crouse wrote:
On 30/10/07 18:14 +0100, Uwe Hermann wrote:
On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 06:07:09PM +0100, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
* Jordan Crouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] [071030 18:03]:
On 30/10/07 03:24 +0100, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
An important issue will be to get the
On 28/10/07 09:06 -0700, ron minnich wrote:
On 10/27/07, Peter Stuge [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please don't ack just because noone else does it. That defeats the
purpose of the reviews.
no, what I meant was, I will do the review and try to make sure the
patch is clean
Sorry for
On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 10:36:14AM +0100, Paul Menzel wrote:
This is a nice write-up and summary. Therefore I would like to see
this in the wiki.
Maybe it could be reworked a little and put on the contribution
guidelines page?
//Peter
--
linuxbios mailing list
linuxbios@linuxbios.org
On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 09:06:45AM -0700, ron minnich wrote:
Please don't ack just because noone else does it.
no, what I meant was, I will do the review and try to make sure
the patch is clean
My bad. Sorry I did not give you more credit than that. :\
I was just very worried that we
This is really great discussion!
On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 09:57:38AM -0600, Jordan Crouse wrote:
I was just very worried that we might have lost another board.
Which is a very reasonable and real fear.
Board no, vendor maybe.
In fact, forst most, this is their first foray into the world
Stefan Reinauer wrote:
* ron minnich [EMAIL PROTECTED] [071029 23:51]:
One possibility is, the next time someone comes in, rather than just
critiquing the code, we get a group of people -- say 3 or 4 -- each of
whom takes on the responsibility for a directory, starting at the
leaves.
* Peter Stuge [EMAIL PROTECTED] [071030 01:31]:
but few want to spend a lot of valuable money and engineering
resources on it -
All business moves require an investment. Some resources will always
be neccessary, be it money, sending out hardware samples, engineering
resources or
* ron minnich [EMAIL PROTECTED] [071030 02:56]:
can we try again then with morgan and sis?
The biggest issue was a concern with the licensing. We were a bit
confused and never got a clear statement that SiS felt it was all gpl.
I did not check the VGA BIOS in yet. We are working on a
On 30/10/07 03:24 +0100, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
* ron minnich [EMAIL PROTECTED] [071030 02:56]:
can we try again then with morgan and sis?
The biggest issue was a concern with the licensing. We were a bit
confused and never got a clear statement that SiS felt it was all gpl.
I did not
Hi,
Am Sonntag, den 28.10.2007, 02:58 +0100 schrieb Peter Stuge:
On Sat, Oct 27, 2007 at 10:13:47AM -0700, ron minnich wrote:
I would like to take this opportunity to address all companies that
are already supporting or are interested in supporting the project:
Thank you very much for
On 10/27/07, Peter Stuge [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please don't ack just because noone else does it. That defeats the
purpose of the reviews.
no, what I meant was, I will do the review and try to make sure the
patch is clean
Sorry for creating confusion. I'm not just going to ack for the sake
On Sat, Oct 27, 2007 at 10:13:47AM -0700, ron minnich wrote:
I already published Northbridge patch, and southbridge yesterday.
If you don't get an ack soon from someone push me and I will do it.
Please don't ack just because noone else does it. That defeats the
purpose of the reviews.
At
21 matches
Mail list logo
