Niltze, On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 8:48 AM, Cyril Brulebois <kibi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi, > > Jose R R <jose@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (2017-03-29): >> With all due respect, 99% of the build code for the debian-installer >> is yours. As well as the build pulls 99% UDEBs from official debian >> repositories. > > That doesn't mean that everything built on top of it has to be reported > on Debian mailing lists and bug tracker. See derivative distributions, > they have their own issue tracker, and only forward specific issues. > >> i.e., this is a Debian issue, not mine -- as I did not even touch that >> code and/or modules -- which 1 month ago actually did work smooth: >> >> Netboot debian-installer was unable to load firmware from second USB >> for wifi connection; accordingly, in another virtual screen, I mounted >> the 2nd USB and manually copied the firmware directory onto the >> installer environment /lib. d-i then detected the wifi signal, etc. >> >> >> Second, report on this unofficial jessie-backports kernel >> 4.9.16-1+reiser4.0.1 sheds light on the fact I experienced *no issue* >> with module i915, as had been reported by (maintainer?): < >> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=858078 > thus, in a >> collateral manner, I am contributing to official debian development. > > If you want to reply to submitters/maintainers, reply to specific bug > reports/threads, instead of sending lengthy mails to other people? > >> Finally, I am not requesting *any* support. I am simply reporting that >> your d-i pulling official UDEBs actually have been successful, with >> minor modifications and a few extra UDEBs of mine, in my installation >> experience, following Debian documentation guidelines: > > I haven't put words in your mouth and suggested you were requesting some > support. I'm just not convinced such reports are useful. If you > encounter specific issues, report specific bug reports against the > relevant component. > > debian-boot@ isn't and shouldn't be the destination of each and every > thing connected to, or merely using, Debian Installer. > >> "We also encourage installation reports to be sent even if the >> installation is successful, so that we can get as much information as >> possible on the largest number of hardware configurations." < >> https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/amd64/ch05s04.html.en#submit-bug >> > > > Sure, with official images. > >> If you are still 'bothered' with my sporadic submissions, I encourage >> you to modify the documentation to specifically exclude the glaring >> omission. > > I could be adding a specific “we don't need reiser4-specific reports” Please do add that phrase; thus removing any ambiguities and cover the glaring omission in the Debian documentation. That clarification will prevent other individuals -- who have downloaded the netboot installer from SourceForge -- from potentially reporting via the debian mechanism -- once the installation completes. Additionally, appending “we don't need reiser4-specific reports” will be a welcome *explicit* change in policy from other FOSS projects, like GNU Parted, where the unspoken censorship on reiser4 bites anyone who submits patches in support of the 'Batman Machine': Reiser4 < https://metztli.it/readOnlyEphemeral/Batman_Machine-Reiser4.pdf > Again, thank you. Best Professional Regards. -- Jose R R http://metztli.it --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Download Debian-Reiser4 for AMD64 https://sf.net/projects/debian-reiser4/ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Try at no charge http://b2evolution.net for http://OpenShift.com PaaS --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- from our GitHub http://Nepohualtzintzin.com repository. Cloud the easy way! -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe reiserfs-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
