On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 09:27:31AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Sun, Sep 11, 2005 at 05:56:38PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > On Sun, Sep 11, 2005 at 04:59:54PM +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: > > > http://www.debian.org/devel/testing : > > > > > > 2. It must be compiled and up to date on all architectures it has > > > previously > > > been compiled for in unstable; > > > > Mmm, so not only adding new binary packages, but removing them also needs > > manual processing ? > > No; removing an _architecture_ requires manual processing.
Well, 2.6.12-5has a bunch of package on hppa, which are no more part of 2.6.12-6, the rest of the 2.6.12-6 packages (probably only the common header package though) is still there. > > Is at least this removal not something that could be automated ? Just > > curious about this one. > > It would seem to me that the difference between 'an oversight' and 'an > intentional omission' is hard to automatedly find. If 2.6.12-5 had a bunch of packages, and 2.6.12-6 has them not anymore, then there is a reason for this, don't you think ? Do you really find many packages which make a bunch of packages dissapear by mistake ? Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
