Re: Next d-i alpha release: late June
On 24 June 2016 at 18:22, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > Hi, > > I've just checked with Ben, it seems we could be getting a 4.6 kernel > suitable for testing (no regressions reported from previous version + > mips* FTBFS fix) shortly. We could think about urgenting it into testing > and releasing a new d-i early in the week, which seems OK on the -cd > side too. > > Glibc maintainers (esp. Aurélien): you should then have a clear path for > the new glibc in unstable. I'm not sure how much time it'll need to be > ready, that's why I'd slightly prefer if we could go for a d-i release > first (as outlined above). In case major blockers pop up, we would > probably let you go ahead with the new glibc upload and postpone d-i > until glibc reaches testing. > > Having checked with -release already, I'm freezing udebs right away. Could someone please tell me what the deadline is for adding expanded partman-btrfs functionality? My proposal is in a thread on debian-b...@lists.debian.org, subject: "Re: btrfs subvolume naming scheme". A résumé of the read is: add the volume-manager-like subvolume setup, and hopefully also add btrfs-style raid1 profile support, and also the question of whether Debian should follow Ubuntu and openSUSE subvolume naming conventions or Fedora/CentOS/RHEL ones. The upstream wiki advocates Fedora/CentOS/RHEL-style. Thank you, Nicholas
Re: Next d-i alpha release: late June
Hi, Nicholas D Steeves (2016-06-28): > Could someone please tell me what the deadline is for adding expanded > partman-btrfs functionality? My proposal is in a thread on > debian-b...@lists.debian.org, subject: "Re: btrfs subvolume naming > scheme". A résumé of the read is: add the volume-manager-like > subvolume setup, and hopefully also add btrfs-style raid1 profile > support, and also the question of whether Debian should follow Ubuntu > and openSUSE subvolume naming conventions or Fedora/CentOS/RHEL ones. > The upstream wiki advocates Fedora/CentOS/RHEL-style. The upcoming release will use whatever is in testing at this point, so it'll be for a later release. KiBi. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Next d-i alpha release: late June
Hi, I've just checked with Ben, it seems we could be getting a 4.6 kernel suitable for testing (no regressions reported from previous version + mips* FTBFS fix) shortly. We could think about urgenting it into testing and releasing a new d-i early in the week, which seems OK on the -cd side too. Glibc maintainers (esp. Aurélien): you should then have a clear path for the new glibc in unstable. I'm not sure how much time it'll need to be ready, that's why I'd slightly prefer if we could go for a d-i release first (as outlined above). In case major blockers pop up, we would probably let you go ahead with the new glibc upload and postpone d-i until glibc reaches testing. Having checked with -release already, I'm freezing udebs right away. (Please cc me on replies.) KiBi. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
