Re: Debian Bug#20445 disagree
Eloy A. Paris <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> OK, I have no problem with taking my packages that depend on a development
> kernel, i.e. 2.1.x, out of Hamm and place them in unstable. However,
> somebody with the requiered authority must make it official and all other
> maintainers in the same situtation must do the same thing with their packages.
> Of course, consensus must be reached first, I think.
For what it's worth, I have a 2.1.92 kernel running hamm.
2.0.* isn't an option for this machine, because it's mca -- and
I've lost my heavily patched 2.0.6 and 2.0.7 kernel sources
(which no longer work as my configuration has changed).
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org