On Sun, Oct 11, 1998 at 02:34:28PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote: > > > Quoting Avery Pennarun ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > > > Slink is a badly-needed cleanup release. Don't hold it back for any > > > > package. > > I still think that calling slink "a badly needed cleanup" implies that > hamm is horribly broken. I agree that it would be good for debian to > release more frequently, but that's not the same as saying that hamm > doesn't work.
"Horribly broken" is probably not the term I would use for hamm. Red Hat 5.0 was horribly broken. Slackware has always been horribly broken. But hamm was so close to perfect -- it almost installs wonderfully, except for a few critical things that mess up as I mentioned in my previous mail. In particular, the X packages install in the wrong order and thus don't work without twiddling. The kernels don't boot on some systems because they have too many drivers. APT isn't the default. Multi-CD support doesn't work (or perhaps it does work, but it's non-obvious if it does). If we avoid delaying releases, Debian 2.2 could be out by April. That gives lots of time to integration-test the Linux 2.2 kernel, and it means slink will be rock-solid for users while they wait. People who really need kernel 2.2 can install it from the new unstable. After all, that's where it belongs -- 2.2.0 is bound to be unstable for a while. Linux 2.2 will break things that we don't expect. I know -- I'm running the 2.1 kernels already, and I've had to hack around a bit of funny behaviour from setserial, ipchains, and a few other packages. That's just me. Other people will have other problems. Not serious ones, but quite a few of them, and if we rush the release of slink we'll miss some. If we don't rush it out, Joey's estimate of a 2-month delay is very reasonable. I don't want to see a two month delay. Have fun, Avery
