Christian Schwarz wrote: > Basically, I agree with you. However, I think we should stick to the usual > procedure. That is, we should prepare a policy change which will then be > discussion on debian-policy and included in the next policy weekly posting > for approval. After that, the policy manual is changed and you could start > filing bug reports.
Oh. Er. I just sent them out. I think your mail arrived while I was sending them :) I didn't expect this to be a matter of determining policy; I thought that because it was listed in the "Upcoming Releases" file, it had been decided on before I joined. That's why I didn't wait very long for comments. (I'm impatient because I have a lot of free time this week, and I'll be much more busy next week. I want to get Debian stuff done :-) > So, if you like, I'd appreciate it if you could come up with a suggestion > for the policy text. (If not, then I'll do it when I have time for this.) I don't think I have the expertise for that. Ray Dassen's version contains many remarks that I can't explain. I just know that it's useful to have the linker warn if you try to link a libc5 library with a libc6 one, especially now that we're building a libc6 release. Richard Braakman -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .