On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 16:45:10 +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 10:16:19AM -0500, David Nusinow wrote: [...] >> >> What about the *massive* issues with releasing d-i due to syncing on all >> arch's? What about the various arch-specific kernel issues that have popped >> up > > This will be solved in etch, or even as soon as sarge is out of the way, when > we will have a single kernel-source package that will generate all binary > kernel packages. This kernel-package could also build the binary .udeb > modules, and all the d-i related kernel problems will vanish in one go. > > I believe the kernel team to be commited and well working (and full of loving > relationships or whatever :), to handle this well. >
Heh, I don't know if I'd used the word "solved". :) It will certainly be made easier, but we'll still have to deal w/ non-mainstream archs that haven't synched w/ upstream (and the build failures related to those probably keeping kernels out of testing unless we forcibly downgrade FTBFS bugs). But yes, it will be quite a relief when we don't have to track kernels (and bugs on those kernels) generated from 20 different source packages... >> and the problems in getting people to make all the necessary fixes? >> What about the huge problems in getting a decently new release of X in >> to Debian because of constant porting problems? > > And we are proud of the quality of our X packages, are we not, and would > we reach this quality without the input of the many porters we are going > to let out in the cold ? Also, let's remember that a large part of the problem w/ X was that upstream did not bother to think about architectures other than x86. I believe this is no longer a problem w/ xorg. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]