=== Signoff report for [testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/
There are currently:
* 6 new packages in last 24 hours
* 0 known bad packages
* 0 packages not accepting signoffs
* 9 fully signed off packages
* 18 packages missing signoffs
* 5 packages older than 14 days
(Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by
pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one
package per architecture, even if it is a split package.)
== New packages in [testing] in last 24 hours (6 total) ==
== All packages in [testing] for more than 14 days (5 total) ==
* pyalpm-0.5.3-1 (i686), since 2011-10-15
* pyalpm-0.5.3-1 (x86_64), since 2011-10-15
* namcap-3.2.1-1 (any), since 2011-10-20
* pacman-4.0.1-1 (i686), since 2011-11-21
* pacman-4.0.1-1 (x86_64), since 2011-11-21
== Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours ==
12-30-2011, 01:51 PM
Carlos Sura
Hello mates,
I'm using now Gnome 3,*
Whenever I login and when I'm connected to my wifi router I get a notification message, I clicked "Don't show this message again".
Is there a way to revert this action, I mean I want to be notified when connected to a network.
But I clicked accidentally in "don't show this message again"*
--
Carlos Sura.-www.carlossura.com
12-30-2011, 02:23 PM
Carlos Sura
On 30 December 2011 08:51, Carlos Sura <carlos.sura1@googlemail.com> wrote:
Hello mates,
I'm using now Gnome 3,*
Whenever I login and when I'm connected to my wifi router I get a notification message, I clicked "Don't show this message again".
Is there a way to revert this action, I mean I want to be notified when connected to a network.
But I clicked accidentally in "don't show this message again"*
--
Carlos Sura.-www.carlossura.com
I found a way:
/apps/nm-applet/suppress-wireless-networks-available
set the value to FALSE (untick) with GCONF-EDITOR
--
Carlos Sura.-www.carlossura.com
12-31-2011, 08:07 AM
Arch Website Notification
=== Signoff report for [community-testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/
There are currently:
* 0 new packages in last 24 hours
* 0 known bad packages
* 0 packages not accepting signoffs
* 2 fully signed off packages
* 5 packages missing signoffs
* 5 packages older than 14 days
(Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by
pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one
package per architecture, even if it is a split package.)
== Incomplete signoffs for [community] (3 total) ==
== All packages in [community-testing] for more than 14 days (5 total) ==
* expac-0.07-1 (i686), since 2011-10-13
* expac-0.07-1 (x86_64), since 2011-10-13
* pacman-contrib-4.0.1-1 (any), since 2011-11-25
* packagekit-0.6.19-3 (i686), since 2011-11-30
* packagekit-0.6.19-3 (x86_64), since 2011-11-30
== Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours ==
1. allan - 12 signoffs
2. dreisner - 8 signoffs
3. dan - 2 signoffs
4. bluewind - 2 signoffs
12-31-2011, 08:07 AM
Arch Website Notification
=== Signoff report for [testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/
There are currently:
* 0 new packages in last 24 hours
* 0 known bad packages
* 0 packages not accepting signoffs
* 17 fully signed off packages
* 8 packages missing signoffs
* 5 packages older than 14 days
(Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by
pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one
package per architecture, even if it is a split package.)
== All packages in [testing] for more than 14 days (5 total) ==
* pyalpm-0.5.3-1 (i686), since 2011-10-15
* pyalpm-0.5.3-1 (x86_64), since 2011-10-15
* namcap-3.2.1-1 (any), since 2011-10-20
* pacman-4.0.1-1 (i686), since 2011-11-21
* pacman-4.0.1-1 (x86_64), since 2011-11-21
== Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours ==
1. allan - 12 signoffs
2. dreisner - 8 signoffs
3. dan - 2 signoffs
4. bluewind - 2 signoffs
01-01-2012, 08:07 AM
Arch Website Notification
=== Signoff report for [community-testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/
There are currently:
* 0 new packages in last 24 hours
* 0 known bad packages
* 0 packages not accepting signoffs
* 2 fully signed off packages
* 5 packages missing signoffs
* 5 packages older than 14 days
(Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by
pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one
package per architecture, even if it is a split package.)
== Incomplete signoffs for [community] (3 total) ==
== All packages in [community-testing] for more than 14 days (5 total) ==
* expac-0.07-1 (i686), since 2011-10-13
* expac-0.07-1 (x86_64), since 2011-10-13
* pacman-contrib-4.0.1-1 (any), since 2011-11-25
* packagekit-0.6.19-3 (i686), since 2011-11-30
* packagekit-0.6.19-3 (x86_64), since 2011-11-30
=== Signoff report for [testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/
There are currently:
* 1 new package in last 24 hours
* 1 known bad package
* 0 packages not accepting signoffs
* 15 fully signed off packages
* 4 packages missing signoffs
* 5 packages older than 14 days
(Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by
pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one
package per architecture, even if it is a split package.)
== New packages in [testing] in last 24 hours (1 total) ==
== All packages in [testing] for more than 14 days (5 total) ==
* pyalpm-0.5.3-1 (i686), since 2011-10-15
* pyalpm-0.5.3-1 (x86_64), since 2011-10-15
* namcap-3.2.1-1 (any), since 2011-10-20
* pacman-4.0.1-1 (i686), since 2011-11-21
* pacman-4.0.1-1 (x86_64), since 2011-11-21
As I suggested a while back, radeon really doesn't work without firmware
on some chips.
Ben.
-------- Forwarded Message --------
From: Gregs git-bot <greg@kroah.com>
To: greg@kroah.com, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Patch Upstream: drm/radeon/kms: bail on BTC parts if MC ucode is missing
Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2012 13:20:53 -0500 (EST)
commit: 77e00f2ea94abee1ad13bdfde19cf7aa25992b0e
From: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 11:58:17 -0500
Subject: drm/radeon/kms: bail on BTC parts if MC ucode is missing
We already do this for cayman, need to also do it for
BTC parts. The default memory and voltage setup is not
adequate for advanced operation. Continuing will
result in an unusable display.
Signed-off-by: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com>
Cc: stable@kernel.org
Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
Signed-off-by: Dave Airlie <airlied@redhat.com>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/evergreen.c | 12 ++++++++++++
1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/evergreen.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/evergreen.c
index 5e00d16..92c9628 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/evergreen.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/evergreen.c
@@ -3276,6 +3276,18 @@ int evergreen_init(struct radeon_device *rdev)
rdev->accel_working = false;
}
}
+
+ /* Don't start up if the MC ucode is missing on BTC parts.
+ * The default clocks and voltages before the MC ucode
+ * is loaded are not suffient for advanced operations.
+ */
+ if (ASIC_IS_DCE5(rdev)) {
+ if (!rdev->mc_fw && !(rdev->flags & RADEON_IS_IGP)) {
+ DRM_ERROR("radeon: MC ucode required for NI+.
");
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+ }
+
return 0;
}
--
1.7.3.4
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
Ben Hutchings
All the simple programs have been written, and all the good names taken.
01-02-2012, 08:07 AM
Arch Website Notification
=== Signoff report for [community-testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/
There are currently:
* 0 new packages in last 24 hours
* 0 known bad packages
* 0 packages not accepting signoffs
* 2 fully signed off packages
* 5 packages missing signoffs
* 5 packages older than 14 days
(Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by
pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one
package per architecture, even if it is a split package.)
== Incomplete signoffs for [community] (3 total) ==
== All packages in [community-testing] for more than 14 days (5 total) ==
* expac-0.07-1 (i686), since 2011-10-13
* expac-0.07-1 (x86_64), since 2011-10-13
* pacman-contrib-4.0.1-1 (any), since 2011-11-25
* packagekit-0.6.19-3 (i686), since 2011-11-30
* packagekit-0.6.19-3 (x86_64), since 2011-11-30
== Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours ==
1. bluewind - 3 signoffs
2. allan - 2 signoffs
01-02-2012, 08:07 AM
Arch Website Notification
=== Signoff report for [testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/
There are currently:
* 4 new packages in last 24 hours
* 1 known bad package
* 0 packages not accepting signoffs
* 13 fully signed off packages
* 8 packages missing signoffs
* 5 packages older than 14 days
(Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by
pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one
package per architecture, even if it is a split package.)
== New packages in [testing] in last 24 hours (4 total) ==
== All packages in [testing] for more than 14 days (5 total) ==
* pyalpm-0.5.3-1 (i686), since 2011-10-15
* pyalpm-0.5.3-1 (x86_64), since 2011-10-15
* namcap-3.2.1-1 (any), since 2011-10-20
* pacman-4.0.1-1 (i686), since 2011-11-21
* pacman-4.0.1-1 (x86_64), since 2011-11-21