On Mon, 2016-10-03 at 22:00 +0200, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: > Ben, > > On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 9:16 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz > > <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote: > > > > On 10/03/2016 09:14 PM, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: > > > > > > You need to consider that d-i only ships radeonfb (there is another > > > > > > bug report from milan@d.o requesting it) about that. So the question > > > is really during d-i should we leave it as-is with a very low level > > > offb, or try to tidy up radeonfb (radeon.ko will never be part of d-i, > > > there is also a long thread about this). > > > > Can you point me to the discussion regarding radeon in d-i? I would be > > curios to know what the problem is. > > From the top of my head I remember a mail (from you) where you gave > some details as to why radeon.ko is not present in during d-i (only > radeonfb.ko is). However today I can only find: > > https://bugs.debian.org/782058#51 > > I thought you mentioned some kind of regression, hence the reason to > not ship radeon.ko during debian installation. > > Do you remember saying that, or am I dreaming ? The only message I can find like that is <https://bugs.debian.org/826629#12>. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Horngren's Observation: Among economists, the real world is often a special case.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part