On 01/12/2012 03:07 AM, Arch Website Notification wrote:
>
> * 4 known bad packages
>
What does this mean? What is a 'bad' package? Why doesn't the sign-off
report say which packages are 'bad'? As a user of [testing] this has
been bugging me, because I don't want to install 'bad' packages.
those packages are not bad in the sense that you will end up with a non
booting system or data loses.
they have minor issues, like a missing module from kernel
--
IonuÈ›
01-12-2012, 08:31 PM
Rik Theys
Hi,
I'm just an end-user but personally I would prefer to see Wheezy release
with a more recent kernel than 3.2. If Wheezy freezes in June linux 3.4
might already be released. When Wheezy releases there will be a 3.5 and
likely even a 3.6.
Having a more recent kernel (like 3.4) will result in having support for
a lot more recent hardware, and possibly more features.
Some of the later fixes might also be easier to backport to a more
recent kernel.
But I have absolutely no experience in maintaining a distribution kernel
and have no idea on what requires the most work (doing stable updates or
backporting drivers), so I could be wrong.
Regards.
Rik
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4F0F5125.1060803@gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/4F0F5125.1060803@gmail.com
01-13-2012, 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
* 2 packages not accepting signoffs
* 4 fully signed off packages
* 9 packages missing signoffs
* 3 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] (9 total) ==
== All packages in [community-testing] for more than 14 days (3 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
== Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours ==
1. tomegun - 2 signoffs
01-13-2012, 08:07 AM
Arch Website Notification
=== Signoff report for [testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/
There are currently:
* 13 new packages in last 24 hours
* 2 known bad packages
* 2 packages not accepting signoffs
* 8 fully signed off packages
* 36 packages missing signoffs
* 3 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 (13 total) ==
== All packages in [testing] for more than 14 days (3 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
== Top five in signoffs in last 24 hours ==
1. tomegun - 2 signoffs
01-14-2012, 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
* 2 packages not accepting signoffs
* 4 fully signed off packages
* 9 packages missing signoffs
* 3 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] (9 total) ==
=== Signoff report for [testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/
There are currently:
* 8 new packages in last 24 hours
* 0 known bad packages
* 2 packages not accepting signoffs
* 9 fully signed off packages
* 37 packages missing signoffs
* 3 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 (8 total) ==
Hi Everyone:*My Machine:* Toshiba NB 305 (Netbook), 1 GB RAM, 250 GB HD, installed Fedora 16 (3.1.0-7.fc16.i686) to external USB hard disk (Toshiba 80GB).* Boatloader also installed to external HD. Two partitions, root and swap.*Problem:* Install went well.* On first boot (and all subsequent), received following error:*"Loading initial ramdisk1. 175159 Initramfs unpacking failed: junk in compressed archiveKernel panic - not syncing: no init foundtry passing init= option to kernel"*Remarks:* Running from the liveusb stick works well, no problems.*Thanks for any help._____________________________________________ __
laptop mailing list
laptop@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/laptop
01-15-2012, 05:15 AM
false
Update:I reinstalled F16 to the external usb HD using the default partitions.* New problem: on "loading initial ramdisk", the system goes to a black screen and then reboots.*BTW, GRUB is loaded onto the external HD.*Thanks.
From: false <ramjacinc@yahoo.com>
To: "laptop@lists.fedoraproject.org" <laptop@lists.fedoraproject.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2012 11:38 AM
Subject:
Hi Everyone:*My Machine:* Toshiba NB 305 (Netbook), 1 GB RAM, 250 GB HD, installed Fedora 16 (3.1.0-7.fc16.i686) to external USB hard disk (Toshiba 80GB).* Boatloader also installed to external HD. Two partitions, root and swap.*Problem:* Install went well.* On first boot (and all subsequent), received following error:*"Loading initial ramdisk1. 175159 Initramfs unpacking failed: junk in compressed archiveKernel panic - not syncing: no init foundtry passing init= option to kernel"*Remarks:* Running from the liveusb stick works well, no problems.*Thanks for any
help.
_______________________________________________
laptop mailing list
laptop@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/laptop
_______________________________________________
laptop mailing list
laptop@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/laptop
01-15-2012, 08:07 AM
Arch Website Notification
=== Signoff report for [community-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
* 4 fully signed off packages
* 15 packages missing signoffs
* 3 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 [community-testing] in last 24 hours (6 total) ==
