Control: severity 837629 serious On 2016-09-14, Rick Thomas wrote: > On Sep 14, 2016, at 5:31 PM, Vagrant Cascadian <vagr...@debian.org> wrote: > >> Worst case, we have to remove it from stretch again if it really is that >> bad... > > I’ll certainly do the test. If it still doesn’t work on the OpenRD, I > would not remove it from stretch just yet. Frankly, there just aren’t > that many OpenRD machines out there, and it works on everything else > we’ve tested it on — including my non-ESATA SheevaPlug. If we can’t > fix it for OpenRD, we’ll have to put a warning in NEWS.Debian, but > IMHO that’s not a reason for denying its benefits to all the other > machine types.
No, a warning in NEWS.Debian is not good enough; I meant removing the targets that "brick" devices. There's no point in shipping something known to be broken in ways that cause boot failures. At one point I disabled the OpenRD* targets as it was failing to build... now we're in a similar situation, only they fail to boot at all even though they build, which is considerably more dangerous... Upgrading the severity to prevent migration to stretch, until we have a better handle on the situation... live well, vagrant
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
