Hello,
On Sat 14 Aug 2021 at 07:55AM +01, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 03:31:02PM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
>> For example, there are those of us who think that the downsides of the
>> combination of 3.0 (quilt) and patches stored unapplied in git are
>> significant, and so
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Sun, 2021-08-15 at 00:02 +0100, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 14th August 2021 we released Debian 11 "bullseye".
>
> There are too many people who should be thanked for their work on
> getting
> us to this point to list them all
On Sat, 14 Aug 2021 at 16:59:24 +0200, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> Wouldn't it be kinda strange to have the chroots building the packages
> for the first bookworm release using a layout which isn't supported by
> bookworm itself…
Yes, it's a little strange, but that's what happens when we don't
On Sat, Aug 14, 2021 at 02:26:29PM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Aug 2021 at 14:33:44 +0200, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> > the current 'transition' plan is to have the
> > release notes nudge all people who upgrade instead of reinstall their
> > systems, chroots and what not to please
On Sat, Aug 14, 2021 at 02:08:33PM +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> Were upgrades impossible in Ubuntu when it switched and were manual
> reinstallation mandatory for the entire user base, chroots, whatnot?
> No. Then why should it be the case for Debian if we do the exact same
> thing with the exact
On Sat, 14 Aug 2021 at 14:33:44 +0200, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> the current 'transition' plan is to have the
> release notes nudge all people who upgrade instead of reinstall their
> systems, chroots and what not to please do it for all of them by hand
> at a to be specified flag day someday
On Sat, 2021-08-14 at 14:33 +0200, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 10:16:57AM +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> > Unless the intention is to deprecate allowing to change
> > /etc/apt/sources.list and mandating that only hard-coded official
> > Debian repositories can be used on
On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 10:16:57AM +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> Unless the intention is to deprecate allowing to change
> /etc/apt/sources.list and mandating that only hard-coded official Debian
> repositories can be used on Debian installations, of course, which would be,
> uh, interesting
Jonathan Dowland schrieb:
>> Amarok was removed as it required the obsolete Qt 4 library. Now that
>> upstream has finally ported it to Qt5, it could be reintroduced to
>> Debian.
>
> That's an interesting way of presenting the situation. Amarok was
> removed because we aggressively removed Qt4,
On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 03:31:02PM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
> For example, there are those of us who think that the downsides of the
> combination of 3.0 (quilt) and patches stored unapplied in git are
> significant, and so we have made attempts to provide alternatives, such
> as git-debrebase.
On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 04:42:51AM +, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 3:22 AM Timothy M Butterworth wrote:
>
> > Debian is missing KDE's Amarok music manager.
>
> Amarok was removed as it required the obsolete Qt 4 library. Now that
> upstream has finally ported it to Qt5, it
11 matches
Mail list logo
