Scott James Remnant wrote:
On Wed, 2009-04-15 at 00:31 +0800, Ian Kent wrote:
My initial testing showed that this didn't work in all cases I checked.
The only reason we need anything at all is backward compatibility.
The whole idea here is to get rid of the need to manually load the
autofs
Scott James Remnant wrote:
On Wed, 2009-04-08 at 15:24 +0800, Ian Kent wrote:
I'm constructing a list of maintainers to include in discussion about a
kernel change to the autofs and autofs4 kernel modules that I expect to
submit some time in the future. It has the potential to be fairly
Hey all,
I am a master CS student and during my little start-up initiative I
encountered a problem, which I believe must also be in the open source
world. How do you decide which feature to implement next? Normally you would
have limited resources and a ton of feature ideas, some of them came from
Scott James Remnant wrote:
On Tue, 2009-04-14 at 23:25 +0800, Ian Kent wrote:
The change I'm planning on proposing is to remove the autofs kernel
module and rename the autofs4 module to autofs. This has implications
for older modprobe code in init scripts as a MODULE_ALIAS() can't do the
On 14/04/09 23:32, Nikolay Kazmin wrote:
Hey all,
I am a master CS student and during my little start-up initiative I
encountered a problem, which I believe must also be in the open source
world. How do you decide which feature to implement next? Normally you would
have limited resources and
Hi,
This is just a small ”thank you” and also ”just look at that” kind of
post. The thing that should be looked at is:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TranslatingUbuntu/JauntyTranslationIssues
Virtually all I18N issues that were a) never fixed in eg. intrepid (or
earlier) b) found out as new (having
Olá hakaishi e a todos.
On Monday 06 April 2009 10:45:24 hakai...@web.de wrote:
Whenever I open a partition the window opens in background. As far as I read
in some Forums
people are also annoyed about the POP-UPs that open in background, like the
info-pop-up
for rebooting because of some
Hi all,
Once upon a time :-)
Six months ago I filed a bug against Mesa for Ubuntu 8.04.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mesa/+bug/283175
I supplied the effects, test case and even a backported patch. This then
gets wishlisted to sit idle for six months until today.
After pain of
On Wed, 2009-04-15 at 19:20 +0100, Philip Wyett wrote:
Hi all,
Once upon a time :-)
Six months ago I filed a bug against Mesa for Ubuntu 8.04.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mesa/+bug/283175
I supplied the effects, test case and even a backported patch. This then
gets
Hello Philip,
Philip Wyett [2009-04-15 19:20 +0100]:
After pain of dealing with the RC Mesa in Ubuntu 8.04 ever since, I
decided to email the technical board about why it and all releases
should be based on a full release of Mesa + patches only, giving
developers a clean base to work with.
On Wed, 2009-04-15 at 23:01 +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
Hello Philip,
Philip Wyett [2009-04-15 19:20 +0100]:
After pain of dealing with the RC Mesa in Ubuntu 8.04 ever since, I
decided to email the technical board about why it and all releases
should be based on a full release of Mesa +
On Wed, 2009-04-15 at 23:48 +0100, Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
I think being on an RC, as opposed to a final release, is as awkward
for us as it is for everyone else. It makes all of our updates harder,
because the codebase is unique to us, it's not a release that upstream
cares about. So, in
12 matches
Mail list logo
