I'm currently looking for people who are willing to "mock up" the process -- current challenge is building a linux-restricted-modules package that does not conflict with existing Dapper packages -- probably means using dapper (dapper-security, actually) l-r-m sources and making it only build the li
I think this is a great idea. I've been rolling over the idea of
building some 2.6.17 goodness (it would help my powerbook out a whole
lot it sounds like). I'd be willing to help in any way possible.
On Fri, 2006-06-23 at 16:36 -0400, John Dong wrote:
> I'd be thrilled to offer this service to Da
I'd be thrilled to offer this service to Dapper Backports users, but it must be done so carefully as not to stumble across problems down the road.
First off, we need to make a list of all the possible scenarios that may arise in the future (such as the mentioned restricted-modules conflicts or ud
Jamie Jones wrote:
On Fri, 2006-06-23 at 06:21 -0400, John Dong wrote:
G'Day John,
As a result, for the users that would desire, I'd like to be able to
offer a backported kernel from Edgy, complete with restricted modules
for ease-of-use. Requirements for this to succeed would be
On Fri, 2006-06-23 at 06:21 -0400, John Dong wrote:
G'Day John,
> As a result, for the users that would desire, I'd like to be able to
> offer a backported kernel from Edgy, complete with restricted modules
> for ease-of-use. Requirements for this to succeed would be:
>
> * It must be opti
I'd like to propose the idea (and thus discuss the implementation) of kernel backports for Dapper.Kernel 2.6.15 is already starting to get old for some users, citing new drivers that require 2.6.16+ to build or a newer ALSA framework that fixes problems with sound, the new Core Duo CPU scheduler, a
Filed bug 50754 to sync planner from Debian unstable.
--
Please Backport Planner 0.14
https://launchpad.net/bugs/49585
--
ubuntu-backports mailing list
ubuntu-backports@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-backports
