[Grml] Next stable release

Hi,

"The next stable release is expected for march 2009." (http://grml.org/

roadmap/)

Will it be out soon? Any pending issues or show-stoppers?

thanks.

--
Tong (remove underscore(s) to reply)
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/techdocs/
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/tools/

T o n g

2009-03-31 20:54:09 UTC

Hi,

"The next stable release is expected for march 2009." (http://grml.org/

roadmap/)

Will it be out soon? Any pending issues or show-stoppers?

thanks.

--
Tong (remove underscore(s) to reply)
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/techdocs/
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/tools/

T o n g

2009-03-31 20:54:09 UTC

Hi,

"The next stable release is expected for march 2009." (http://grml.org/

roadmap/)

Will it be out soon? Any pending issues or show-stoppers?

thanks.

--
Tong (remove underscore(s) to reply)
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/techdocs/
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/tools/

Michael Prokop

2009-03-31 22:07:50 UTC

"The next stable release is expected for march 2009." (http://grml.org/
roadmap/)

Will it be out soon? Any pending issues or show-stoppers?

In the last days I was hunting a very annoying bug preventing our
build system to build recent daily ISOs:

http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=520989
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=521863

Talking about show-stoppers: yeah, we've some:

http://preview.tinyurl.com/c37ucu [1]

The most important one is the kernel issue: should we think about
re-enabling PATA support? I guess it might be worth a try to start a
poll for this issue, so we developers have more feedback about what
our users need. (I won't tell my personal opinion about this issue
before the poll finished. ;))

Any help in resolving the release-stoppers is highly welcome of
course. Coding as well as testing. :)

[1] Sorry for using tinyurl, I'm not a friend of it but the URL is
*really* too long. ;) I'll set up an according redirect for the
future on our webserver...

regards,
-mika-
--
http://grml.org/ # Linux for texttool-users and sysadmins
http://wiki.grml.org/ # share your knowledge
http://grml.supersized.org/ # the grml development weblog
#grml @ irc.freenode.org # meet us on irc
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.mur.at/pipermail/grml/attachments/20090401/8eaec934/attachment.pgp

T o n g

2009-04-01 02:54:12 UTC

Thanks for the answers, mika.

Post by Michael Prokop
The most important one is the kernel issue: should we think about
re-enabling PATA support? I guess it might be worth a try to start a
poll for this issue

PATA is disabled? Does it mean that IDE / ATA HD is not supported
currently by grml? I don't know exactly what it means to disable PATA,
but please, please do support IDE/ATA, because there are tons of exiting
PCs still using nothing but IDE/ATA.

Thanks

--
Tong (remove underscore(s) to reply)
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/techdocs/
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/tools/

Jason White

2009-04-01 02:58:28 UTC

Post by T o n g
PATA is disabled? Does it mean that IDE / ATA HD is not supported
currently by grml?

Not if the new libata drivers are enabled in the kernel instead of the old IDE
drivers, which I have been informed on other mailing lists are now regarded as
legacy code.

T o n g

2009-04-01 03:25:32 UTC

Thanks for the reply.

Post by Jason White

Post by T o n g
PATA is disabled? Does it mean that IDE / ATA HD is not supported
currently by grml?

Not if the new libata drivers are enabled in the kernel instead of the
old IDE drivers, which I have been informed on other mailing lists are
now regarded as legacy code.

Then for people who only have IDE hard disks (not SATA), what should they
do to use the HD?

thanks

--
Tong (remove underscore(s) to reply)
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/techdocs/
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/tools/

Jason White

2009-04-01 03:40:06 UTC

Post by T o n g
Then for people who only have IDE hard disks (not SATA), what should they
do to use the HD?

It's still supported but it appears as /dev/sda, /dev/sdb etc., with the new
drivers.

Jason White

2009-04-01 03:40:06 UTC

Post by T o n g
Then for people who only have IDE hard disks (not SATA), what should they
do to use the HD?

It's still supported but it appears as /dev/sda, /dev/sdb etc., with the new
drivers.

Jason White

2009-04-01 03:40:06 UTC

Post by T o n g
Then for people who only have IDE hard disks (not SATA), what should they
do to use the HD?

It's still supported but it appears as /dev/sda, /dev/sdb etc., with the new
drivers.

T o n g

2009-04-01 03:25:32 UTC

Thanks for the reply.

Post by Jason White

Post by T o n g
PATA is disabled? Does it mean that IDE / ATA HD is not supported
currently by grml?

Not if the new libata drivers are enabled in the kernel instead of the
old IDE drivers, which I have been informed on other mailing lists are
now regarded as legacy code.

Then for people who only have IDE hard disks (not SATA), what should they
do to use the HD?

thanks

--
Tong (remove underscore(s) to reply)
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/techdocs/
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/tools/

T o n g

2009-04-01 03:25:32 UTC

Thanks for the reply.

Post by Jason White

Post by T o n g
PATA is disabled? Does it mean that IDE / ATA HD is not supported
currently by grml?

Not if the new libata drivers are enabled in the kernel instead of the
old IDE drivers, which I have been informed on other mailing lists are
now regarded as legacy code.

Then for people who only have IDE hard disks (not SATA), what should they
do to use the HD?

thanks

--
Tong (remove underscore(s) to reply)
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/techdocs/
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/tools/

Jason White

2009-04-01 02:58:28 UTC

Post by T o n g
PATA is disabled? Does it mean that IDE / ATA HD is not supported
currently by grml?

Not if the new libata drivers are enabled in the kernel instead of the old IDE
drivers, which I have been informed on other mailing lists are now regarded as
legacy code.

Jason White

2009-04-01 02:58:28 UTC

Post by T o n g
PATA is disabled? Does it mean that IDE / ATA HD is not supported
currently by grml?

Not if the new libata drivers are enabled in the kernel instead of the old IDE
drivers, which I have been informed on other mailing lists are now regarded as
legacy code.

T o n g

2009-04-07 16:43:47 UTC

In the last days I was hunting a very annoying bug preventing our build
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=520989
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=521863

You may have know it already -- the bug was merged with #518921, which
was fixed on 9 Mar 2009, and installed in the Debian archive on 26 Mar
2009.

--
Tong (remove underscore(s) to reply)
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/techdocs/
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/tools/

Michael Prokop

2009-04-08 07:22:33 UTC

In the last days I was hunting a very annoying bug preventing our build
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=520989
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=521863

You may have know it already -- the bug was merged with #518921, which
was fixed on 9 Mar 2009, and installed in the Debian archive on 26 Mar
2009.

Yeah, thanks. It's just not for Debian/etch though. (The fix was to
upgrade to 2.6.29 for now.)

regards,
-mika-
--
http://grml.org/ # Linux for texttool-users and sysadmins
http://wiki.grml.org/ # share your knowledge
http://grml.supersized.org/ # the grml development weblog
#grml @ irc.freenode.org # meet us on irc
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.mur.at/pipermail/grml/attachments/20090408/c1c9b3c4/attachment.pgp

T o n g

2009-04-09 03:33:46 UTC

Post by Michael Prokop
In the last days I was hunting a very annoying bug preventing our
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=520989
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=521863

You may have know it already -- the bug was merged with #518921, which
was fixed on 9 Mar 2009, and installed in the Debian archive on 26 Mar
2009.

Yeah, thanks. It's just not for Debian/etch though. (The fix was to
upgrade to 2.6.29 for now.)

hmm... I only find linux-image-2.6.29-1-amd64 by now for kernels 2.6.29.
Is there a grml version for v2.6.29?

On page,
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=518921
it says that the bug is fixed in linux-2.6 2.6.26-14, and patches are
included for kernels 2.6.27.20 and 2.6.28.8.

I mean, has linux-image-2.6.28-grml* been patched yet?

thank

--
Tong (remove underscore(s) to reply)
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/techdocs/
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/tools/

Michael Prokop

2009-04-09 08:27:05 UTC

Post by T o n g
You may have know it already -- the bug was merged with #518921, which
was fixed on 9 Mar 2009, and installed in the Debian archive on 26 Mar
2009.

Yeah, thanks. It's just not for Debian/etch though. (The fix was to
upgrade to 2.6.29 for now.)

hmm... I only find linux-image-2.6.29-1-amd64 by now for kernels 2.6.29.

Yes.

Post by T o n g
Is there a grml version for v2.6.29?

No. 2.6.29 provides squashfs in mainline, though lacks lzma
compression currently. We'll release grml 2009.0X with kernel
2.6.28-grml which is known to work fine.

Post by T o n g
On page,
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=518921
it says that the bug is fixed in linux-2.6 2.6.26-14, and patches are
included for kernels 2.6.27.20 and 2.6.28.8.
I mean, has linux-image-2.6.28-grml* been patched yet?

It will receive the patch with update to 2.6.28.8 soon.

regards,
-mika-
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.mur.at/pipermail/grml/attachments/20090409/ced97ec7/attachment.pgp

Michael Prokop

2009-04-09 08:27:05 UTC

Post by T o n g
You may have know it already -- the bug was merged with #518921, which
was fixed on 9 Mar 2009, and installed in the Debian archive on 26 Mar
2009.

Yeah, thanks. It's just not for Debian/etch though. (The fix was to
upgrade to 2.6.29 for now.)

hmm... I only find linux-image-2.6.29-1-amd64 by now for kernels 2.6.29.

Yes.

Post by T o n g
Is there a grml version for v2.6.29?

No. 2.6.29 provides squashfs in mainline, though lacks lzma
compression currently. We'll release grml 2009.0X with kernel
2.6.28-grml which is known to work fine.

It will receive the patch with update to 2.6.28.8 soon.

regards,
-mika-
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://ml.grml.org/pipermail/grml/attachments/20090409/ced97ec7/attachment-0002.pgp>

Michael Prokop

2009-04-09 08:27:05 UTC

Post by T o n g
You may have know it already -- the bug was merged with #518921, which
was fixed on 9 Mar 2009, and installed in the Debian archive on 26 Mar
2009.

Yeah, thanks. It's just not for Debian/etch though. (The fix was to
upgrade to 2.6.29 for now.)

hmm... I only find linux-image-2.6.29-1-amd64 by now for kernels 2.6.29.

Yes.

Post by T o n g
Is there a grml version for v2.6.29?

No. 2.6.29 provides squashfs in mainline, though lacks lzma
compression currently. We'll release grml 2009.0X with kernel
2.6.28-grml which is known to work fine.

T o n g

2009-04-09 03:33:46 UTC

You may have know it already -- the bug was merged with #518921, which
was fixed on 9 Mar 2009, and installed in the Debian archive on 26 Mar
2009.

Yeah, thanks. It's just not for Debian/etch though. (The fix was to
upgrade to 2.6.29 for now.)

--
Tong (remove underscore(s) to reply)
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/techdocs/
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/tools/

T o n g

2009-04-09 03:33:46 UTC

You may have know it already -- the bug was merged with #518921, which
was fixed on 9 Mar 2009, and installed in the Debian archive on 26 Mar
2009.

Yeah, thanks. It's just not for Debian/etch though. (The fix was to
upgrade to 2.6.29 for now.)

--
Tong (remove underscore(s) to reply)
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/techdocs/
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/tools/

Michael Prokop

2009-04-08 07:22:33 UTC

In the last days I was hunting a very annoying bug preventing our build
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=520989
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=521863

You may have know it already -- the bug was merged with #518921, which
was fixed on 9 Mar 2009, and installed in the Debian archive on 26 Mar
2009.

Yeah, thanks. It's just not for Debian/etch though. (The fix was to
upgrade to 2.6.29 for now.)

regards,
-mika-
--
http://grml.org/ # Linux for texttool-users and sysadmins
http://wiki.grml.org/ # share your knowledge
http://grml.supersized.org/ # the grml development weblog
#grml @ irc.freenode.org # meet us on irc
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://ml.grml.org/pipermail/grml/attachments/20090408/c1c9b3c4/attachment-0002.pgp>

Michael Prokop

2009-04-08 07:22:33 UTC

In the last days I was hunting a very annoying bug preventing our build
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=520989
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=521863

You may have know it already -- the bug was merged with #518921, which
was fixed on 9 Mar 2009, and installed in the Debian archive on 26 Mar
2009.

Yeah, thanks. It's just not for Debian/etch though. (The fix was to
upgrade to 2.6.29 for now.)

regards,
-mika-
--
http://grml.org/ # Linux for texttool-users and sysadmins
http://wiki.grml.org/ # share your knowledge
http://grml.supersized.org/ # the grml development weblog
#grml @ irc.freenode.org # meet us on irc
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://ml.grml.org/pipermail/grml/attachments/20090408/c1c9b3c4/attachment-0003.pgp>

T o n g

2009-04-01 02:54:12 UTC

Thanks for the answers, mika.

Post by Michael Prokop
The most important one is the kernel issue: should we think about
re-enabling PATA support? I guess it might be worth a try to start a
poll for this issue

--
Tong (remove underscore(s) to reply)
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/techdocs/
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/tools/

T o n g

2009-04-07 16:43:47 UTC

In the last days I was hunting a very annoying bug preventing our build
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=520989
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=521863

You may have know it already -- the bug was merged with #518921, which
was fixed on 9 Mar 2009, and installed in the Debian archive on 26 Mar
2009.

--
Tong (remove underscore(s) to reply)
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/techdocs/
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/tools/

T o n g

2009-04-01 02:54:12 UTC

Thanks for the answers, mika.

Post by Michael Prokop
The most important one is the kernel issue: should we think about
re-enabling PATA support? I guess it might be worth a try to start a
poll for this issue

--
Tong (remove underscore(s) to reply)
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/techdocs/
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/tools/

T o n g

2009-04-07 16:43:47 UTC

In the last days I was hunting a very annoying bug preventing our build
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=520989
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=521863

You may have know it already -- the bug was merged with #518921, which
was fixed on 9 Mar 2009, and installed in the Debian archive on 26 Mar
2009.

--
Tong (remove underscore(s) to reply)
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/techdocs/
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/tools/

Michael Prokop

2009-03-31 22:07:50 UTC

"The next stable release is expected for march 2009." (http://grml.org/
roadmap/)

Will it be out soon? Any pending issues or show-stoppers?

In the last days I was hunting a very annoying bug preventing our
build system to build recent daily ISOs:

http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=520989
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=521863

Talking about show-stoppers: yeah, we've some:

http://preview.tinyurl.com/c37ucu [1]

The most important one is the kernel issue: should we think about
re-enabling PATA support? I guess it might be worth a try to start a
poll for this issue, so we developers have more feedback about what
our users need. (I won't tell my personal opinion about this issue
before the poll finished. ;))

Any help in resolving the release-stoppers is highly welcome of
course. Coding as well as testing. :)

[1] Sorry for using tinyurl, I'm not a friend of it but the URL is
*really* too long. ;) I'll set up an according redirect for the
future on our webserver...

regards,
-mika-
--
http://grml.org/ # Linux for texttool-users and sysadmins
http://wiki.grml.org/ # share your knowledge
http://grml.supersized.org/ # the grml development weblog
#grml @ irc.freenode.org # meet us on irc
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://ml.grml.org/pipermail/grml/attachments/20090401/8eaec934/attachment-0002.pgp>

Michael Prokop

2009-03-31 22:07:50 UTC