On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 12:13:13PM -0500, David Nusinow wrote:
On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 10:05:15AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 12:06:15PM -0500, David Nusinow wrote:
On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 05:43:26PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
[1] The installer might be a point
it.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 03:11:06PM +0100, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
[ Please followup to the right list depending on the contents of your
reply. Be aware I'm not subscribed to -kernel, so Cc me if needed ]
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 08:14:37AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
[huge rant about NEW
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 03:10:34PM +, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 03:20:29PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
Anyway, regarding kernels: I can imagine sometimes, especially with the
backlog we have currently, a swift processing of some kernel package
might be warranted
their stuff
in their corner, let's just hope that it will benefit everyone.
--- Tapio Lehtonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 12:45:33PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
discussion forward in such a way that we can get a resonable
discussion at the
helsinski debconf'05 meeting
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 07:42:11PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
Sven Luther wrote:
And what do you say of aj denying there is a NEW problem on the debian-vote
threads ?
I don't know what Steve says, but I say: Cite.
I don't care what you say, i am out of this anyway, there is no way i can
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 03:45:10PM +, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 04:08:19PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
Thanks. Maybe i should resign from my debian duties then since i am not
wanted. Do you volunteer to take over my packages ? Please handle parted for
which i am
queue ? I had to mail twice about
this, and nothing ever happened for almost a month of so, all the while you
where spamming all of debian-kernel daily with said bogus reject message ?
Hurt,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 05:40:44PM +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
[Sven Luther]
the problem is not the reject, is the no news in weeks and no
communication channel open. But again, i think and hope that this
will become better now.
I agree. Complete silence and no feedback is a real
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 12:17:45PM +0100, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
Sven Luther wrote:
[snip]
For sarge, kernels are built in a two-stage process. First is to create
a dsfg-free .deb from the upstream source which contains a source
tarball, second is to build kernel images from another (arch
debian is, and which
is handled by utter contempt, at least in the initial posting.
Still hurt though,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
of the way in a couple of month or whatever.
Hurt,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 08:28:44PM +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
[Sven Luther]
No, he is not, as far as i am concerned, unless he presents his
apologies first.
For what? Commenting on your wast amount of email posted the last few
days, and his suggestion that the amount of email
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 05:23:12PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, that is not acceptable, and probably not the right reason for this.
Until
evidence proves otherwise, it is just because they don't care to read those
emails, and that that email
them resign in masse and be prepared to
replace them.
There is no accountability, and altough the DPL supposedly mandated them, he
has no actual power to do anything about it.
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL
: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Description:
ocaml - ML language implementation with a class-based object system
ocaml-base - Runtime system for ocaml bytecode executables
ocaml-base-nox - Runtime system for ocaml
, we
should take issues like the above into consideration.
Why didn't you take less drastic solutions in consideration ? Or if you did,
why didn't you speak about them ?
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
work ?
And a non-elected, non-properly-delegated, self-apointed group of people at
that.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 09:22:11PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
Sven Luther wrote:
I think the main reply is for developers using said archs.
Developers *developing* on those architectures need to use unstable
But it could be an unstable chroot, while their day-to-day work is done
On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 02:40:34PM +0100, David Schmitt wrote:
On Friday 18 March 2005 13:26, Sven Luther wrote:
And yes, i volunteer to help out NEW handling, if that help is wanted.
Vapourware. I believe that for most packages it is quite easy to see why they
are not allowed
time), and i didn't get a single reply
to this.
And do you seriously think that the ftp-master team would have been expanded
like it has, if the issue would not have aired publicly recently ? I have some
doubts about it.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 02:34:12PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
On 10232 March 1977, Sven Luther wrote:
Would you be happy if the ftpmasters put everything on auto-veto if there
was nobody available to monitor the auto-new queue for a few days?
If the NEW queue handling people can't get
will post soon may help here, will help
bring things forward.
Friendly,
Sven luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
the benefit of testing at a lesser cost.
I would look at the code, and implement this myself, but i don't speak python,
so i am utherly useless for this kind of things.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
to make a daily
unstable install, and count how many days it is broken on the tier1 arches,
and see how worse it can become on tier2 slower arches.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
it.
If they don't need any support from anyone else, they're welcome to do
whatever they like. If they want other people to help them, I don't
think it's unreasonable to expect an answer to a What's the point?
question.
as long as the replies don't get ignored.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
will be
streamlined for etch into a single package, and maybe build issues, which
could be solved by a separate build queue or priority for d-i issues.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
have less time to do their real job, which
means an additional push to the ports in question into an early grave.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
to solve it, don't we ?
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
, but a cooperative effort with
you (with me signing and uploading the packages until you can again), would be
a good thing.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 10:26:44PM +1100, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 09:07:52AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 02:57:23AM +0100, Peter 'p2' De Schrijver wrote:
* Three bodies (Security, System Administration, Release) are given
independent veto
fancier mirroring software.
We can't. AFAIK: One or two rsync commands, and *that's*it*.
Any required fanciness need to be done on the master server.
Rsync can take fancier arguments though :)
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject
On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 04:59:57PM +0100, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
Sven Luther wrote:
Problems with many arches:
- same for the security team.
Hmm. I only saw Joey's message on the subject, which basically seemed to
say as long as it's only one source compiling on all arches, it's OK
Yep
On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 10:53:57PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 09:56:05AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 12:00:23PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
But why would you spend over 1000 pounds on an arm Linux desktop box
instead of a few hundred pounds
On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 06:24:23PM +0100, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
Sven Luther wrote:
The idea is that we don't want to hold up release, but we still want to
allow
for a future release at a later point, in a stable point release.
Especially
now that we are told that security is not an issue
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 01:16:42AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
Sven Luther wrote:
The ftp-masters are mandated by the DPL to handle the debian
infrastructure,
not to decide what arches debian should support or not.
This is not the case; ftpmaster's role has historically included at what
On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 08:20:40PM +0100, David Schmitt wrote:
On Sunday 20 March 2005 12:08, Sven Luther wrote:
On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 02:40:34PM +0100, David Schmitt wrote:
On Friday 18 March 2005 13:26, Sven Luther wrote:
And yes, i volunteer to help out NEW handling, if that help
On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 02:35:56PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 12:11:07PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 05:05:07PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
And yes, i volunteer to help out NEW handling, if that help is wanted.
Just for the record
-By: Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Description:
kbd-chooser - Detect a keyboard and select layout (udeb)
Changes:
kbd-chooser (1.11) unstable; urgency=high
.
* Sven Luther
- Modified grep in kbd-chooser.c, so we can now detect if a console=tty0
is present after a console=tty[sS
Maintainer: Debian Kernel Team debian-kernel@lists.debian.org
Changed-By: Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Description:
kernel-build-2.6.8-power3 - build infrastructure for kernel version
2.6.8-power3
kernel-build-2.6.8-power3-smp - build infrastructure for kernel version
2.6.8-power3-smp
kernel-build
-boot@lists.debian.org
Changed-By: Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Description:
affs-modules-2.6.8-power3-di - Amiga filesystem support (udeb)
affs-modules-2.6.8-power4-di - Amiga filesystem support (udeb)
affs-modules-2.6.8-powerpc-di - Amiga filesystem support (udeb)
cdrom-core-modules-2.6.8
directly to arch-unstable, in case of stals and such.
Also, building from testing makes synchronizing with tier-1 testing for an
arch stable release easier.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
/years or whatever.
And yes, i volunteer to help out NEW handling, if that help is wanted.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ftpmasters with a
script to automatically check that the debian/copyright file on a package is
reasonably correct. Shouldn't be too hard for a clever fellow such as
yourself.
Like do a diff of it with the GPL, and reject it if it is not ?
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 09:06:10AM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 10:15:50PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
To know in how many packages to split or not to split the packages ?
That would be one of the things that maintainers have gotten wrong in the
past, yes.
So
to the augsbourg power5 box (but without
virtual machine, so we can't really do kernel or installer tests), we don't
have those ppc64 machine IBM mentioned could be made available, which makes
work on the kernel and installer part at least less possible.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
such),
and that the name got changed to powerpc64.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
?
Obviously I have no power to overrule you on your choice of architecture
name, but I'd like to try and appeal to some common sense in you, if
there is any.
Hehe.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 02:35:27AM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 03:29:28PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
Ideally we would see forming a little NEW-reviewing comittee which would
facilitate the job of the ftp-masters. This is also in accordance of the
small-team proposal
the response one get to tidbit of information send to the
ftp-masters about one selfs package sitting in NEW, you should understand the
discouragement that such kind of thrown-away work is.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble
, and if they are not broken, automated NEW is applied (with a delay as
always), while if they are broken, the reviewed NEW is applied.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 06:43:52PM +0100, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
Hi,
Sven Luther:
On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 04:36:25PM +0100, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
- check that the package names are sane, don't conflict, and
aren't gratuitiously many (a -doc package for 10 kbytes
On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 07:57:11PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
On 10231 March 1977, Sven Luther wrote:
- check that the package names are sane, don't conflict, and
aren't gratuitiously many (a -doc package for 10 kbytes of
documentation...) (what's the current opinion on that, anyway
Distribution: experimental
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Description:
ocaml - ML language implementation with a class-based object system
ocaml-base - Runtime system for ocaml bytecode executables
ocaml-base-nox - Runtime
processed.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
make the source changeset over tier-1 stable bigger than necessary
due to the fact that arch-specific fixes will only be fixed once tier-1 stable
has been released.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL
release...
Well, we could drop mac/m68k supported subarch then ?
For that matter, it would probably make sense to drop 2.4 kernels fully in the
not so far future.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL
On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 04:21:56AM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
Sven Luther wrote:
After reading the mention of it in debian-weekly-news, i read with interest
:
http://kitenet.net/~joey/blog/entry/random_idea_re_new_queue-2005-03-02-21-12.html
And i am not sure to get the hang
requirement which may be orthogonal
to the release team requirements, as their timeline is fully different
(post-release vs pre-release).
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
that in the announcement ?
And will mirrors be able to decide which arch they want to mirror ? or will
the set of arches be imposed by debian ?
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
for the missing information in the first mail.
Thanks for the clarifications,
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 11:23:48PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 10:32:57AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 12:23:12AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Sun, Mar 13, 2005 at 11:21:29PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Steve Langasek [EMAIL
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 04:51:55PM -0800, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 01:14:30AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 06:10:30PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
Yes, I would like to reiterate that coordination between Martin Pitt, the
Ubuntu kernel team
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 04:21:21AM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
Sven Luther wrote:
There is this vendor-specific-security-announce-with-embargo thingy.
The debian kernel team mostly handles the unstable and testing kernel, is
not
in the loop for getting advance advice on those problems, so
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 01:21:59AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 11:00:12AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
There are a few problems with trying to run testing for architectures
that aren't being kept in sync. First, if they're not being kept in
sync, it increases
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 11:18:54AM +0100, David Schmitt wrote:
On Tuesday 15 March 2005 10:41, Sven Luther wrote:
Could you be more clear about this ? which issues are those ?
Sven, Steve is referring to the first part of his mail, where he says that
building from testing will lose any
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 12:22:34PM +0100, David Schmitt wrote:
On Monday 14 March 2005 17:18, Sven Luther wrote:
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 11:12:29AM -0500, David Nusinow wrote:
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 09:54:49AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
It is not unstable that I am (most) worried about
, is there anything in the works for 2.6 ?
Yep, runs since a couple of month last time i was informed for that, at least
on the amiga arch.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
though, which may be the reason for this
perceived problem.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 11:47:37AM +, Colin Watson wrote:
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 05:38:30PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
I have proposed tier-1 ports for the main arches, tier-2 ports for the other
ready ports but dropped from official support, and tier-3 ports for
in-development ports
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 01:41:01PM +0100, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 12:59:43PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
With the new proposal of de facto dropping m68k support, I'm this --
close
to recommend to Roman, that he better should invest his time into other
a redirect to the more comprehensive site.
I heard about it through slashdot the first time though :).
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 08:51:30AM -0800, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 09:50:22AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 04:51:55PM -0800, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 01:14:30AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 06:10
)
May i ask for powerpc DVD images too ?
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
, and /debian-devel or
something such. Is it really a physical problem fro ftp-master to held all
these roles ? What is it exactly that ftp-masters want to drop all these
arches for ?
Mirrors could then chose to go with 1) only (most of them will), or also
mirror 2) and/or 3).
Friendly,
Sven Luther
if i remember well.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
thing, but that it lacks much
information about the reason which pushed the decision, and the individual
technical problems to be overcome. Are the minutes of the release-team meeting
publically available ?
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject
be not an over-burden for those guys ?
You are really just saying that the testing scipts don't scale well, and
instead of finding a solution to this, you say let's drop a bunch of
architecture,
and make it another-one's problem.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED
,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
knew about this plan previously to replying that, especially those of
the scud team. Pure demagogy then ?
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-essential)
need to be buildable from unmodified source?
- the port must demonstrate that they have at least 50 users
How do you demonstrate that? Via popularity-contest?
But then, popularity-contest installation per default was dropped for
debian-installer rc3, so ...
Friendly,
Sven Luther
,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 02:12:48AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
BTW, how much of the human intervention needed for buildd signing
plays in the delays you see, and did you discuss the possibiliity of
a fully autobuilder setup, like ubuntu does
with).
One could add per-subarch optimized builds and mirrors too though.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 11:26:07AM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote:
* Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050314 11:20]:
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 10:39:24AM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
On Sun, Mar 13, 2005 at 08:45:09PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
- the port must demonstrate that they have
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 11:26:27AM +0100, A Mennucc wrote:
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 11:09:27AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 10:40:55AM +0100, A Mennucc wrote:
you may find source, i386 and powerpc and sparc binaries
of mplayer 1.0pre6a-4 in your friendly repository
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 11:28:08AM +0100, Andreas Schuldei wrote:
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 11:05:16AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
And how do you reconcile the fact that most of those told us recently on
debian-vote that they believed that dropping an architecture will not help
with the delay
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 11:38:57AM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote:
* Sven Luther ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050314 11:35]:
Well, but wouldn't reenabling the popularity-contest by default for sarge
help
a lot on that ?
There was a technical reason why it was removed - more or less, if you
Yes
instead of those who maintain central infrastructure.
Like the arm autobuilders for example ? Mmm, but then the arm buildd
maintainer is also our main ftp-master, right ?
Friendly,
Sven luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
who do the work, also get to make the decisions.
Not really, unless you want to fork the whole debian infrastructure that is.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 01:02:34PM +0100, David Schmitt wrote:
On Monday 14 March 2005 11:00, Sven Luther wrote:
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 01:14:47AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
There are a few problems with trying to run testing for architectures
that aren't being kept in sync. First
with the
DPL candidates. It can be found here:
Yep, probably. I believe it should have been posted to debian-vote too though.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 06:23:50AM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
Sven Luther wrote:
Yes, it asked one question during the install, wasn't it ? One potentially
confusing question to the poor user.
That's almost as innacurate as your earlier statement that
popularity-contest was dropped from d-i
people, toolchain
people, porters, and basically everyone else that this is the way to
Well, there is no clear consensus about what debian is and should be in the
future among these people to start with, so ...
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 12:36:45PM +0100, Roland Mas wrote:
Sven Luther, 2005-03-14 10:50:13 +0100 :
I don't see how having the in-devel arches be hosted on alioth
instead on the official debian ftp server would cause a problem.
The amd64 archive on Alioth has been (and still
, and
the buildd where maintained by who ? elmo.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and they
won't be officially released.
So, there are no stable release to be running and be sure you have no
problems, and no testing to be sure some random developer who doesn't think
past x86 break your upgrade on a random basis.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED
301 - 400 of 1016 matches
Mail list logo
