Not a user of btrfs, but the userspace tools are in package btrfs-tools
https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=btrfs-tools
and the kernel modules seem to be in the default kernel packages
$ dpkg -L linux-image-3.2.0-4-amd64 | grep btrfs.ko
/lib/modules/3.2.0-4-amd64/kernel/fs/btrfs/btrfs.ko
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 09:43:20AM -0700, Aaron Toponce wrote:
> Recently, I decided to put down a Btrfs root on my workstation using the
> latest release of the installer. I found that given my hardware
> configuration, this is not possible, and would require using another
> installer or debootstr
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 09:41:22PM +0200, Sven Arvidsson wrote:
> Have you reported this as a bug upstream so proper quirks can be
> added?
Not yet, as I was only just this week able to easily test KMS (now
that it works with PAE in an official Linux kernel release packaged
for Debian). Support fo
On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 16:12 +, The Fungi wrote:
> Yes, this has been working for me with 2.6.31 (putting
> GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX_DEFAULT="video=i915:modeset=1" in
> /etc/default/grub, to be specific). Still waiting to be able to add
> custom modelines at boot since my HDTV outputs bogus EDID info
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 05:56:27PM +0200, Luca Niccoli wrote:
> Pass modeset=1 as a parameter to the module.
Yes, this has been working for me with 2.6.31 (putting
GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX_DEFAULT="video=i915:modeset=1" in
/etc/default/grub, to be specific). Still waiting to be able to add
custom modeli
2009/10/7 The Fungi :
> Now if only it had CONFIG_DRM_I915_KMS
Pass modeset=1 as a parameter to the module.
Cheers,
Luca
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 11:51 +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Oct 2009, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > That package is currently called firmware-linux but will be renamed
> > shortly because we now also package the DFSG-free firmware from the
> > Linux tree as firmware-linux-free. (firmware-linux
On Thu, 8 Oct 2009, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> That package is currently called firmware-linux but will be renamed
> shortly because we now also package the DFSG-free firmware from the
> Linux tree as firmware-linux-free. (firmware-linux will then become a
> metapackage.)
Thanks a lot for this advic
On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 00:01 +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Oct 2009, Martin Ågren wrote:
> > I believe one of us misread Russell. :) I thought he meant "While I
> > understand that you'll be crapped on if a kernel upload eats data, I
> > think it would be ok to ...". As I read it, he's no
On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 02:24:36PM +, The Fungi wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 08, 2009 at 12:01:13AM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> [...]
> > But it has been pointed out a few times (including a couple of
> > private messages) that experimental has what I desire (thanks for
> > the advice everyone).
> [.
> On Wed, 7 Oct 2009, Alexey Salmin wrote:
>> I think it's reasonable for package maintainers to check compatibility
>> with the kernel from the
>> distribution they upload package to. Especialy here when package is
>> newer then kernel driver.
>> It's of course harder to supervise the situation w
On Thu, Oct 08, 2009 at 12:01:13AM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
[...]
> But it has been pointed out a few times (including a couple of
> private messages) that experimental has what I desire (thanks for
> the advice everyone).
[...]
Now if only it had CONFIG_DRM_I915_KMS and CONFIG_HID_WACOM enable
On Wed, 7 Oct 2009, Martin Ågren wrote:
> I believe one of us misread Russell. :) I thought he meant "While I
> understand that you'll be crapped on if a kernel upload eats data, I
> think it would be ok to ...". As I read it, he's not expecting them to
> do anything *more* than they already do, j
2009/10/7 Josselin Mouette :
> Le mercredi 07 octobre 2009 à 14:12 +1100, Russell Coker a écrit :
>> I expect that the kernel team tends to be more careful about uploads to
>> Unstable than most package maintainers due to the scope of damage that a bad
>> kernel can cause.
>
> I think it is unreaso
I think it's reasonable for package maintainers to check compatibility
with the kernel from the
distribution they upload package to. Especialy here when package is
newer then kernel driver.
It's of course harder to supervise the situation when kernel pass
ahead of user-space packages
but it's also
Le mercredi 07 octobre 2009 à 14:12 +1100, Russell Coker a écrit :
> I expect that the kernel team tends to be more careful about uploads to
> Unstable than most package maintainers due to the scope of damage that a bad
> kernel can cause.
I think it is unreasonable to ask them to check interac
On mer, 2009-10-07 at 14:12 +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> I expect that the kernel team tends to be more careful about uploads to
> Unstable than most package maintainers due to the scope of damage that a bad
> kernel can cause. But would it be possible to have an upload of a newer
> kernel for
17 matches
Mail list logo
