Marc Haber wrote: >On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 20:26:33 +0000, Ben Hutchings ><b...@decadent.org.uk> wrote: >> >>I can't imagine why you would expect this to work. > >I wouldn't. The site was just surprised by the point release and did >notice the deployment failure well before the announcement of the >point release was received. This deployment setup has been in effect >for a while, so I'd guess that this point release was the first to >break compatibility between older kernel/initrd and current kernel >udebs. If this is in fact the rule, I need to investgate why things >used to work for years, but not having older point releases around any >more, this is kind of hard to reproduce.
snapshot.debian.org is very helpful if you want to try to reproduce/test this kind of thing. ... >>Just point to the bug report and stop stirring. > >Do you really think that this tone to users of your software will get >you any friends? You're being unnecessarily rude and impolite. You already posted a bug report and complained at Ben there, please don't continue here. >#645308, by the way. > >> I'm sorry this has >>introduced a regression for these systems, but you have a workaround >>and the backport enabled installation on many other systems. > >In nearly all non-kernel issues, we don't care zilch about enhancing >support and new features if there is the slightest chance of breaking >existing setups inside a stable release. I fail to see why the kernel >is so special that it warrants an exception. In fact, the kernel is >the last component of a distribution I would be willing to accept a >"more features" upgrade in a stable point release because of the vast >variety of things that can go wrong when a driver is updated _and_ the >fact that there is no way to install x.y.z-1 after the release of >x.y.z. The kernel team have done an excellent job of backporting drivers for newer hardware for a number of releases now. Mistakes occasionally happen... In terms of *why* those updates happen, that's quite simple: if Debian won't run on a user's new hardware, that user will typically simply ignore Debian. In (most) other packages, this isn't so critical - the latest shiny version doesn't matter that much. Up-to-date hardware support is one of the biggest issues I see reported about Debian with our long release cycles, so I'm very supportive of people like Ben who are directly spending a lot of their time on trying to solve the problem. -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. st...@einval.com "Because heaters aren't purple!" -- Catherine Pitt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e1rrskb-00089n...@mail.einval.com