You can subscribe to this list here.
2003 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(5) |
Jun
(13) |
Jul
(6) |
Aug
|
Sep
(16) |
Oct
(14) |
Nov
(10) |
Dec
(23) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2004 |
Jan
(38) |
Feb
(49) |
Mar
(21) |
Apr
(41) |
May
(15) |
Jun
(38) |
Jul
(43) |
Aug
(13) |
Sep
(37) |
Oct
(61) |
Nov
(17) |
Dec
(2) |
2005 |
Jan
(68) |
Feb
(11) |
Mar
(28) |
Apr
(25) |
May
(11) |
Jun
(11) |
Jul
(21) |
Aug
(6) |
Sep
(117) |
Oct
(38) |
Nov
(4) |
Dec
(12) |
2006 |
Jan
(21) |
Feb
(34) |
Mar
(72) |
Apr
(21) |
May
(78) |
Jun
(61) |
Jul
(45) |
Aug
(46) |
Sep
(72) |
Oct
(18) |
Nov
(29) |
Dec
(31) |
2007 |
Jan
(9) |
Feb
(8) |
Mar
(9) |
Apr
(30) |
May
(8) |
Jun
(16) |
Jul
(3) |
Aug
(8) |
Sep
(10) |
Oct
(17) |
Nov
(4) |
Dec
(22) |
2008 |
Jan
(16) |
Feb
(9) |
Mar
|
Apr
(2) |
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
(2) |
Aug
(2) |
Sep
(1) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
2009 |
Jan
(7) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
2010 |
Jan
|
Feb
(2) |
Mar
(8) |
Apr
|
May
(3) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
From: priti P. <pri...@gm...> - 2007-11-28 10:30:52
|
Hi, Could anyone please guide me in creating rpm based live CD/DVD with Morphix. Wants to use RPM repositories and create customized CD/DVD resolving all the package dependencies. Thanks. Priti |
From: Alex de L. <al...@de...> - 2007-11-26 21:59:21
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi Brendan, Brendan Sleight wrote: > I notice that each packages in the morphix packages list are now > signed with SHA256, but the release file hs not been signed with > SHA256. SHA256 wasn't in mini-dinstall, but I've hacked it in (and sent a patch to the maintainers). Hope this works now, if not please let me know! cheers, Alex PS. new m-i-matchbox package also uploaded -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHSznvQeuQA5TF/UsRAiHvAJ9eV3NAi0e8zSkAIJM3EZIIU2Sw6ACePsmn Fbm7VDOSsPGQIg4hdhkg8Lk= =ZBwW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
From: Brendan S. <me...@ba...> - 2007-11-25 22:55:00
|
Hi Alex et al, Regarding the error seen in sid main-module autobuilds but not etch; ".deb Hash Sum mismatch" http://www.morphix.org/autobuilds/mainmod/sid/morphix-gnome-2007-11-25_0416.log http://www.morphix.org/autobuilds/mainmod/etch/morphix-gnome-2007-11-25_0018.log I notice that each packages in the morphix packages list are now signed with SHA256, but the release file hs not been signed with SHA256. http://www.morphix.org/debian/unstable/Packages.gz http://www.morphix.org/debian/unstable/Release I think sid requires both the Package and Releases files to be signed by sha256 now, since apt 0.7.7 http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/a/apt/apt_0.7.9/changelog Sorry do not have a sid machine at the moment to verify, but this is my guess. 'nextime' solved the 'Hash Sum' error for this it for his repository by forcing to check for md5sum, which his release file was signed against. Regards, Brendan |
From: Alex de L. <al...@de...> - 2007-10-17 20:13:43
|
Paul wrote: > Indeed, it always helps to call the correct function rather than rely on Lady > Luck :) > > Patch applied & committed, thanks. New version of morphix-mmaker uploaded. cheers, Alex PS. More like Lady I'm-too-lazy-to-test-my-code :) |
From: Paul <pa...@tu...> - 2007-10-17 17:31:04
|
On Wednesday 17 October 2007 17:26, Michael Bunk wrote: > I tried to install my new cloop .deb, but failed to integrate my private > debian repository. =A0I found the localdeb feature in the docs/source of > mmaker, but my .deb was not installed. > > It turns out that it is better to call the right function... Indeed, it always helps to call the correct function rather than rely on L= ady=20 Luck :) Patch applied & committed, thanks. Regards, Paul. |
From: Alex de L. <al...@de...> - 2007-10-17 17:12:15
|
Michael Bunk wrote: > I tried to install my new cloop .deb, but failed to integrate my private > debian repository. I found the localdeb feature in the docs/source of > mmaker, but my .deb was not installed. > > It turns out that it is better to call the right function... Thanks for the fix, my bad! |
From: Michael B. <mb...@co...> - 2007-10-17 16:26:26
|
I tried to install my new cloop .deb, but failed to integrate my private debian repository. I found the localdeb feature in the docs/source of mmaker, but my .deb was not installed. It turns out that it is better to call the right function... Best regards, Michael |
From: Paul <pa...@tu...> - 2007-10-15 17:08:59
|
Hi Michael On Monday 15 October 2007 15:39, Michael Bunk wrote: > Klaus Knopper found the bug, but didn't publish the source code yet (at > least I didn't find it). =A0I asked him on debian-knoppix to publish the > source code Reading the archives, I see you are now in possession of the latest source= =20 code.. ;) > > PS. moving to squash might indeed be a better idea in the long run. > > Why? =A0Is the compression ratio better, because it doesn't have to > compress file system data? =A0How much better? http://kerneltrap.org/files/PERFORMANCE.README.txt provides some illustrati= ve=20 figures to compare - Perhaps in time, when squashfs and/or cloop are merged= =20 in to the mainline kernel tree, maintainance & development will keep up to= =20 date rather than continually lagging behind (I see 2.6.23 is now "out"). Regards, Paul. |
From: Michael B. <mb...@co...> - 2007-10-15 14:39:55
|
Hello Alex, Alex de Landgraaf schrieb: > Thanks for this information, I've built the same cloop packages and > uploaded them into the repository. unionfs is patched into the kernel. > > I've added the basemod-2.6.22.xml template to the base-autobuilds, we'll > know how well this worked tomorrow. Unfortunately it doesn't work :( You can disable the autobuild again. It seems cloop not working with recent kernels was an obstable for Knoppix distribution itself: http://lists.debian.org/debian-knoppix/2007/09/msg00012.html Klaus Knopper found the bug, but didn't publish the source code yet (at least I didn't find it). I asked him on debian-knoppix to publish the source code ( My mail is not archived yet, so here is only a link to the October Index of the mailing list archive http://lists.debian.org/debian-knoppix/2007/10/maillist.html ). > PS. moving to squash might indeed be a better idea in the long run. Why? Is the compression ratio better, because it doesn't have to compress file system data? How much better? Best regards, Michael |
From: Alex de L. <al...@de...> - 2007-10-13 22:39:55
|
Hi all, Michael Bunk wrote: > At least the compiled packages are not for 2.6.22-5 ... I didn't get > time to build my own. > > But I worked on the cloop kernel module: In > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=436090 a new version of > it is pointed out that has not entered unstable yet. Since I didn't get > along with Klaus Knopper's debian/rules I copied compressed_loop.c > > and compressed_loop.h from his new > package into the unpacked Debian source package and rebuilt... the > result should be a brand new morphix-suitable cloop kernel module > package, which I didn't get to try out yet... Thanks for this information, I've built the same cloop packages and uploaded them into the repository. unionfs is patched into the kernel. I've added the basemod-2.6.22.xml template to the base-autobuilds, we'll know how well this worked tomorrow. cheers, Alex PS. moving to squash might indeed be a better idea in the long run. |
From: Michael B. <mb...@co...> - 2007-10-12 16:22:52
|
Hello Paul, Brendan and Alex, > As I understand it, cloop is deprecated in favour > of squashfs, and unionfs Paul, do you mean in general or in morphix? Brendan Sleight schrieb: > On 05/10/2007, Alex de Landgraaf wrote: >> No, the new basemod template doesn't work, I've still to add the unionfs >> and cloop packages compiled against the kernel in the repository. > >> I'll see what I can do over the weekend. Last time I tried it cloop and >> unionfs weren't compiling against the kernel. > > This just popped up in another mailing list:- > > "If you are interested in using unionfs with 2.6.22 kernels I have made > some patches. > > I'm running thin clients with unionfs+squashfs with 2.6.22-2-486 without > problems." > > http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-live-devel/2007-October/002327.html At least the compiled packages are not for 2.6.22-5 ... I didn't get time to build my own. But I worked on the cloop kernel module: In http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=436090 a new version of it is pointed out that has not entered unstable yet. Since I didn't get along with Klaus Knopper's debian/rules I copied compressed_loop.c and compressed_loop.h from his new package into the unpacked Debian source package and rebuilt... the result should be a brand new morphix-suitable cloop kernel module package, which I didn't get to try out yet... Did you make any progress? Michael |
From: Alex de L. <al...@de...> - 2007-10-08 18:16:52
|
Brendan Sleight wrote: > Problem with the Autobuilds, in particular the bases. They were ok for > builds done on and before the 06-Oct. Problem afterwards - hence no > AutoTesting videos. > > Looking at the logs:- > http://www.morphix.org/autobuilds/base/basemod-2.6.17-2007-10-07_0014.log > "Failed to fetch http://www.morphix.org/debian/./Packages.gz 403 Forbidden" My bad, wanted to check who's awake. Re-uploading packages, should be ok for tonights build. cheers, Alex |
From: Brendan S. <me...@ba...> - 2007-10-08 18:10:39
|
Hi All, Problem with the Autobuilds, in particular the bases. They were ok for builds done on and before the 06-Oct. Problem afterwards - hence no AutoTesting videos. Looking at the logs:- http://www.morphix.org/autobuilds/base/basemod-2.6.17-2007-10-07_0014.log "Failed to fetch http://www.morphix.org/debian/./Packages.gz 403 Forbidden" Also http://www.morphix.org/debian/unstable - Returns a "403 Forbidden error" But http://www.morphix.org/debian/ is fine. Regards, Brendan |
From: Brendan S. <me...@ba...> - 2007-10-06 22:26:04
|
On 05/10/2007, Alex de Landgraaf wrote: > No, the new basemod template doesn't work, I've still to add the unionfs > and cloop packages compiled against the kernel in the repository. > I'll see what I can do over the weekend. Last time I tried it cloop and > unionfs weren't compiling against the kernel. This just popped up in another mailing list:- "If you are interested in using unionfs with 2.6.22 kernels I have made some patches. I'm running thin clients with unionfs+squashfs with 2.6.22-2-486 without problems." http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-live-devel/2007-October/002327.html BMS |
From: Brendan S. <bm...@ba...> - 2007-10-06 22:25:40
|
On 05/10/2007, Alex de Landgraaf wrote: > No, the new basemod template doesn't work, I've still to add the unionfs > and cloop packages compiled against the kernel in the repository. > I'll see what I can do over the weekend. Last time I tried it cloop and > unionfs weren't compiling against the kernel. This just popped up in another mailing list:- "If you are interested in using unionfs with 2.6.22 kernels I have made some patches. I'm running thin clients with unionfs+squashfs with 2.6.22-2-486 without problems." http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-live-devel/2007-October/002327.html BMS |
From: Brendan S. <me...@ba...> - 2007-10-06 07:46:33
|
On 05/10/2007, Paul wrote: > only be found in the -mm patchset - Some users also like the eyecandy > provided by the bootsplash patch. Indeed. It is an unique selling point of Morphix, it has boot-splash and it is _easy_ to change. I really appreciate this being kept in the base. 2p, Brendan |
From: Alex de L. <al...@de...> - 2007-10-05 22:30:21
|
Michael Bunk wrote: > Do you or Alex have the status on a recent kernel? > > I have seen there is a basemod for 2.6.22: > http://morphix.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/morphix/trunk/mmaker/templates/basemod-2.6.22.xml?view=markup > > Does it work? Yes, I could try it out by myself but no time now... :) > > If it works, why are there no autiobuilds of it? > > If it doesn't work: What is broken? > > Also, why does Morphix need a custom kernel at all? Can't we use some > Debian kernel? Don't the current kernels have cloop and unionfs as > modules in the .deb? Ooo, lots of questions. No, the new basemod template doesn't work, I've still to add the unionfs and cloop packages compiled against the kernel in the repository. I actually do use the debian kernel source packages, but for the whole livecd-thingy to work well the kernel configuration has to be modified, thus separate kernel image packages. It used to be a bigger deal than it is today. I'll see what I can do over the weekend. Last time I tried it cloop and unionfs weren't compiling against the kernel. cheers, Alex |
From: Paul <pa...@tu...> - 2007-10-05 21:52:50
|
On Friday 05 October 2007 16:59, Michael Bunk wrote: > Do you or Alex have the status on a recent kernel? I have a *very* experimental 2.6.20 based base mod - Not suitable for gener= al=20 use as it was produced as a "proof of concept" and includes some unusual=20 patches.. > I have seen there is a basemod for 2.6.22: > http://morphix.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/morphix/trunk/mmaker/templates/= ba >semod-2.6.22.xml?view=3Dmarkup > > Does it work? =A0Yes, I could try it out by myself but no time now... :) Don't know - If Alex has a package ready, we can set Zathras up to autobuil= d=20 it. > Also, why does Morphix need a custom kernel at all? =A0Can't we use some > Debian kernel? =A0Don't the current kernels have cloop and unionfs as > modules in the .deb? As I understand it, cloop is deprecated in favour of squashfs, and unionfs = can=20 only be found in the -mm patchset - Some users also like the eyecandy=20 provided by the bootsplash patch. For my part, I have a couple of experimental patches that I try to sneak i= n=20 that would never be considered for a mainstream Debian build. Regards, Paul. |
From: Michael B. <mb...@co...> - 2007-10-05 16:00:30
|
Hello Brendan, I only get to work on this once a week, so here comes my late reply. > I have updated the templates and the manual page. All the base, > MainModule and MiniModules all fit nicely together. I done a couple > of test build and I am happy with the results. > http://www.morphix.org/doc/how_tos/docbook_html/ar01s05.html My machine is still following your procedure, but I blieve that you tested it and that it will succeed. I had solved the out-of-date R-Kiosk problem last week by updating the tar file, but using a debian package instead is more nice, because is simplifies the morphix xml files. > Like I said before - I plan to a release when I have finished updating > MorphingMorphix. Alas the kernel is only 2.6.15, but Alex is playing > with the base module. Do you or Alex have the status on a recent kernel? I have seen there is a basemod for 2.6.22: http://morphix.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/morphix/trunk/mmaker/templates/basemod-2.6.22.xml?view=markup Does it work? Yes, I could try it out by myself but no time now... :) If it works, why are there no autiobuilds of it? If it doesn't work: What is broken? Also, why does Morphix need a custom kernel at all? Can't we use some Debian kernel? Don't the current kernels have cloop and unionfs as modules in the .deb? > But if anyone has got an idea how to help with the pdf problem, please > point me in the right direction. > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=404402 Will look at that next week, when my .iso and me are ready to reproduce the bug. Best regards, Michael |
From: Brendan S. <me...@ba...> - 2007-10-03 19:03:35
|
Hello Michael, Rudi, et al, On 27/09/2007, Michael Bunk wrote: > I have put the basemod-2.6.17-2007-09-27_0330.iso and > morphix-livekiosk-2007-09-26_0018.mod autobuilds together. As you know, > the kernel is not up to date. For the LiveKiosk, the R-Kiosk-Plugin > installed is 0.3, which doesn't want to work with Firefox/Iceweasel > 2.0. It asks for an upgrade upon start or disables itself. So I'll try > to update the R-Kiosk at the minimod/mainmod level now, OK? Where or To > whom to send the results in case I make it? I have updated the templates and the manual page. All the base, MainModule and MiniModules all fit nicely together. I done a couple of test build and I am happy with the results. http://www.morphix.org/doc/how_tos/docbook_html/ar01s05.html Like I said before - I plan to a release when I have finished updating MorphingMorphix. Alas the kernel is only 2.6.15, but Alex is playing with the base module. Thanks to Jure for pointing me in the direct of webconverger package. It means that I have got ridden of the horrible tar-ball I was using. All Debian -type packages now apart from the two lines to set navbar on/off and homepage. Guess I be buying Jure a beer next week :) http://tinyurl.com/2lguyr http://tinyurl.com/38o6rt On 29/09/2007, Rudi van Drunen wrote: > If I do not need to do a complete rebuild and doing things an more easy > way (which for sure must exist, only I do not get the merits) to get > from a 0.0.3 iso for the kiosk to an version that has custom home page > and custom background an easy step by step guide would be highly > appreciated. As I have moved away from the tar-ball, an upgrade from 0.0.3 is no longer possible. Full rebuilt at the moment. [But hey its only two lines :) ]. The plan is to have an option in MorphingMorphix to download MorphixLiveKiosk_0.0.4_MainModule, then ask the following:- * Do you want the the navigation bar visible ? * What homepage url ? * Which Graphics Files to be used for re-branding ? Then out spits a shinny customized MorphixLiveKiosk. But if anyone has got an idea how to help with the pdf problem, please point me in the right direction. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=404402 Regards, Brendan |
From: Brendan S. <me...@ba...> - 2007-09-30 23:59:08
|
On 30/09/2007, Brendan Sleight wrote: > struggling to set the correct homepage - I just need to find the right > -.js file to edit. /usr/share/iceweasel-extensions/webconverger/defaults/preferences/prefs.js I have edited MorphixMini-KioskSetting.xml template.If anyone is in a hurry to test. BMS |
From: Brendan S. <me...@ba...> - 2007-09-30 22:27:00
|
Hi Michael, Rudi at al, Sorry - bit of a cross post. Some progress over the weekend, just struggling to set the correct homepage - I just need to find the right -.js file to edit. In the meantime, the following this should build an up to date MorphixLiveKiosk:- wget http://morphix.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/*checkout*/morphix/trunk/mmaker/templates/basemod-2.6.15.xml wget http://morphix.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/*checkout*/morphix/trunk/mmaker/templates/morphix-livekiosk.xml wget http://morphix.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/*checkout*/morphix/trunk/scripts-mini/MorphixMini-KioskSetting.xml wget http://morphix.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/*checkout*/morphix/trunk/scripts-mini/MorphixMini-NonFree-Java.xmlwget wget http://morphix.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/*checkout*/morphix/trunk/scripts-mini/MorphixMini-NonFree-FlashPlugin.xml wget http://www.morphix.org/doc/how_tos/images/MorphixLiveKiosk.png editor ./MorphixMini-KioskSetting.xml isomaker -b ./basemod-2.6.15.xml -m ./morphix-livekiosk.xml -n ./MorphixMini-KioskSetting.xml -n ./MorphixMini-NonFree-Java.xml -n MorphixMini-NonFree-FlashPlugin.xml -r http://www.morphix.org/debian -p grub-gfxboot-iso-udeb -p morphix-cdrom-misc-udeb -p morphix-grub-menulist-udeb -p morphix-iso-grubtheme ./morphix-livekiosk.iso Regards, Brendan |
From: Brendan S. <bm...@ba...> - 2007-09-30 13:06:35
|
You would need to make a new (biggger) miniroot and format it with the correct filesystem (ext2). Rough commands from memory - as I can not find any examples... Use dd and /dev/zero and block size to make the new file big enough Paritition the file cfdisk Format the partition loop mount rw Copy files umount This is all from memory and I have not looked at the base for a while so you treat with a pinch of salt. Hope this helps, Brendan |
From: Paul <pa...@tu...> - 2007-09-30 11:48:48
|
Hi Alex On Sunday 30 September 2007 12:39, Alex Gonzalez wrote: > I am trying to include a custom kernel in a morphix base module, but I > don't seem able to copy the scsi modules to the miniroot without > running out of space. I have realized that the modules I built > (2.6.17) are much bigger than the ones that come with the miniroot in > basemod-2.6.17-2007-09-28_0330.iso. For example 3w-xxxx.ko was 30K > against 198K. That is quite a substantial increase in size - Have you enabled profiling support (CONFIG_PROFILING) along with any of the extended kernel hacking options ? If in doubt, post your kernel config. Regards, Paul. |
From: Alex G. <la...@gm...> - 2007-09-30 11:39:28
|
Hi, I am trying to include a custom kernel in a morphix base module, but I don't seem able to copy the scsi modules to the miniroot without running out of space. I have realized that the modules I built (2.6.17) are much bigger than the ones that come with the miniroot in basemod-2.6.17-2007-09-28_0330.iso. For example 3w-xxxx.ko was 30K against 198K. Can anybody help? Thanks, Alex |