Re: 2.6.21-rc5

On Sat, Mar 31, 2007 at 07:22:38PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
> any voices against basing trunk on latest upstream?
> have an i386 working tree to commit.
> 
> should 2.6.20 first be copied to sid?

The etch kernel is frozen, right, and will never be updated, so there is
nothing stopping us from uploading 2.6.20 to unstable now, right ? 

Friendly,

Sven Luther

Processing of linux-modules-extra-2.6_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.changes

linux-modules-extra-2.6_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
  linux-modules-extra-2.6_2.6.18-7+etch2.dsc
  linux-modules-extra-2.6_2.6.18-7+etch2.tar.gz
  gspca-modules-2.6.18-4-486_2.6.18+01.00.04-7+etch2_i386.deb
  gspca-modules-2.6-486_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb
  redhat-cluster-modules-2.6.18-4-486_2.6.18+1.03.00-7+etch2_i386.deb
  redhat-cluster-modules-2.6-486_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb
  squashfs-modules-2.6.18-4-486_2.6.18+3.1r2-7+etch2_i386.deb
  squashfs-modules-2.6-486_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb
  unionfs-modules-2.6.18-4-486_2.6.18+1.4+debian-7+etch2_i386.deb
  unionfs-modules-2.6-486_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb
  gspca-modules-2.6.18-4-686_2.6.18+01.00.04-7+etch2_i386.deb
  gspca-modules-2.6-686_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb
  redhat-cluster-modules-2.6.18-4-686_2.6.18+1.03.00-7+etch2_i386.deb
  redhat-cluster-modules-2.6-686_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb
  squashfs-modules-2.6.18-4-686_2.6.18+3.1r2-7+etch2_i386.deb
  squashfs-modules-2.6-686_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb
  unionfs-modules-2.6.18-4-686_2.6.18+1.4+debian-7+etch2_i386.deb
  unionfs-modules-2.6-686_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb
  gspca-modules-2.6.18-4-k7_2.6.18+01.00.04-7+etch2_i386.deb
  gspca-modules-2.6-k7_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb
  redhat-cluster-modules-2.6.18-4-k7_2.6.18+1.03.00-7+etch2_i386.deb
  redhat-cluster-modules-2.6-k7_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb
  squashfs-modules-2.6.18-4-k7_2.6.18+3.1r2-7+etch2_i386.deb
  squashfs-modules-2.6-k7_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb
  unionfs-modules-2.6.18-4-k7_2.6.18+1.4+debian-7+etch2_i386.deb
  unionfs-modules-2.6-k7_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb
  gspca-modules-2.6.18-4-686-bigmem_2.6.18+01.00.04-7+etch2_i386.deb
  gspca-modules-2.6-686-bigmem_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb

linux-modules-extra-2.6 override disparity

There are disparities between your recently accepted upload and the
override file for the following file(s):

unionfs-modules-2.6-486_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb: package says section is admin, override says misc.
unionfs-modules-2.6-686_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb: package says section is admin, override says misc.
unionfs-modules-2.6-k7_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb: package says section is admin, override says misc.

Either the package or the override file is incorrect.  If you think
the override is correct and the package wrong please fix the package
so that this disparity is fixed in the next upload.  If you feel the
override is incorrect then please reply to this mail and explain why.

[NB: this is an automatically generated mail; if you replied to one
like it before and have not received a response yet, please ignore
this mail.  Your reply needs to be processed by a human and will be in
due course, but until then the installer will send these automated
mails; sorry.]

--
Debian distribution maintenance software

(This message was generated automatically; if you believe that there
is a problem with it please contact the archive administrators by
mailing ftpmaster <at> debian.org)

linux-modules-extra-2.6_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.changes ACCEPTED

Mapping testing to testing-proposed-updates.

Accepted:
gspca-modules-2.6-486_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb
  to pool/main/l/linux-modules-extra-2.6/gspca-modules-2.6-486_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb
gspca-modules-2.6-686-bigmem_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb
  to pool/main/l/linux-modules-extra-2.6/gspca-modules-2.6-686-bigmem_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb
gspca-modules-2.6-686_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb
  to pool/main/l/linux-modules-extra-2.6/gspca-modules-2.6-686_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb
gspca-modules-2.6-amd64_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb
  to pool/main/l/linux-modules-extra-2.6/gspca-modules-2.6-amd64_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb
gspca-modules-2.6-k7_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb
  to pool/main/l/linux-modules-extra-2.6/gspca-modules-2.6-k7_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb
gspca-modules-2.6-vserver-686_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb
  to pool/main/l/linux-modules-extra-2.6/gspca-modules-2.6-vserver-686_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb
gspca-modules-2.6-vserver-k7_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb
  to pool/main/l/linux-modules-extra-2.6/gspca-modules-2.6-vserver-k7_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb
gspca-modules-2.6-xen-686_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb
  to pool/main/l/linux-modules-extra-2.6/gspca-modules-2.6-xen-686_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb
gspca-modules-2.6-xen-vserver-686_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb
  to pool/main/l/linux-modules-extra-2.6/gspca-modules-2.6-xen-vserver-686_2.6.18-7+etch2_i386.deb
gspca-modules-2.6.18-4-486_2.6.18+01.00.04-7+etch2_i386.deb
  to pool/main/l/linux-modules-extra-2.6/gspca-modules-2.6.18-4-486_2.6.18+01.00.04-7+etch2_i386.deb
gspca-modules-2.6.18-4-686-bigmem_2.6.18+01.00.04-7+etch2_i386.deb
  to pool/main/l/linux-modules-extra-2.6/gspca-modules-2.6.18-4-686-bigmem_2.6.18+01.00.04-7+etch2_i386.deb
gspca-modules-2.6.18-4-686_2.6.18+01.00.04-7+etch2_i386.deb
  to pool/main/l/linux-modules-extra-2.6/gspca-modules-2.6.18-4-686_2.6.18+01.00.04-7+etch2_i386.deb
gspca-modules-2.6.18-4-amd64_2.6.18+01.00.04-7+etch2_i386.deb
  to pool/main/l/linux-modules-extra-2.6/gspca-modules-2.6.18-4-amd64_2.6.18+01.00.04-7+etch2_i386.deb
gspca-modules-2.6.18-4-k7_2.6.18+01.00.04-7+etch2_i386.deb

Bug#113036: hi from kendra

Hi,
i am here sitting in the internet caffe. Found your email and
decided to write. I am 25 y.o.girl.
I have a picture if you want. No need to reply here as 
this is not may email. Write me at akendra699 <at> highfindme.info

Processed: Re: Bug#417121: pcmciautils: Data Corruption while using Texas Instrument PCI7420 --CardBus

Processing commands for control <at> bugs.debian.org:

> reassign 417121 linux-2.6
Bug#417121: pcmciautils: Data Corruption while using Texas Instrument PCI7420   --CardBus
Bug reassigned from package `pcmciautils' to `linux-2.6'.

> thanks
Stopping processing here.

Please contact me if you need assistance.

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

Bug#417172: marked as done (linux-image-2.6.18-4-686: failure to mount root fs if usb drive plugged in (-486 not affected, tho))

Your message dated Sun, 1 Apr 2007 21:00:39 +0200
with message-id <20070401190039.GL16041 <at> baikonur.stro.at>
and subject line Bug#417172: linux-image-2.6.18-4-686: failure to mount root fs if usb drive plugged in
(-486 not affected, tho)
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

From: noahdain <at> gmail.com <noahdain <at> gmail.com>
Subject: linux-image-2.6.18-4-686: failure to mount root fs if usb drive plugged in (-486 not affected, tho)
Date: 2007-04-01 18:32:52 GMT

Package: linux-image-2.6.18-4-686
Version: 2.6.18.dfsg.1-12
Severity: important

Re: 2.6.21-rc5

Hi,

On Sat, Mar 31, 2007 at 07:22:38PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
> any voices against basing trunk on latest upstream?
> have an i386 working tree to commit.
> 
> should 2.6.20 first be copied to sid?

IMHO we should upload 2.6.20.4 to unstable, and 2.6.21-rc to
experimental. 

Best regards
Frederik Schueler

--

-- 
ENOSIG

2.6.20 [was Re: 2.6.21-rc5 ]

On Sat, 31 Mar 2007, Oleg Verych wrote:

> I'm running it nearly five days. I'm on amd64, without sysfs, did some
> dvd burning, playing music have strange random glitches (maybe some
> more NO_HZ problems).
> 
> But i would suggest to wait next rc, it's going to be very soon.

why waiting?
it would have latest -git patch too.

so next step would be to upload 2.6.20 into unstable.
announcing upload for tuesday.
please tell if you have some patches needing to go into.

--

-- 
maks

Re: 2.6.20 [was Re: 2.6.21-rc5 ]

01-04-2007, maximilian attems:
> On Sat, 31 Mar 2007, Oleg Verych wrote:
>
>> I'm running it nearly five days. I'm on amd64, without sysfs, did some
>> dvd burning, playing music have strange random glitches (maybe some
>> more NO_HZ problems).
>> 
>> But i would suggest to wait next rc, it's going to be very soon.
>
> why waiting?
> it would have latest -git patch too.

If with -git, that's fine.

> so next step would be to upload 2.6.20 into unstable.
> announcing upload for tuesday.
> please tell if you have some patches needing to go into.

2.6.20.5 is planned on the same day:

| Responses should be made by Tuesday, April 3, 00:00:00 UTC.  Anything
| received after that time might be too late.
|
| thanks,
|
| greg k-h

patch: kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/testing/patch-2.6.20.5-rc1.gz
____