* Mike Hommey
| On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 08:18:25AM +0200, Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
|
| > For the first, there are well working mirror scripts that prevent that,
|
| Why on earth aren't they in place on official mirrors ? I *always* get
| 404 errors for new packages at the time P
On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 08:18:25AM +0200, Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> * Mike Hommey ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050403 14:55]:
> > I think he's talking about mirrored Packages files being updated before
> > all the packages get mirrored and/or arch all packages reaching the
> > archive bef
* Mike Hommey ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050403 14:55]:
> I think he's talking about mirrored Packages files being updated before
> all the packages get mirrored and/or arch all packages reaching the
> archive before arch specific builds (except the maintainer's arch),
> because of buildd queue.
For the
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> Why, if tests can be automated
which tests?
Gruss
Bernd
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, Apr 03, 2005 at 02:26:34PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> On Sun, April 3, 2005 05:39, John Hasler said:
> >> For instance, let's say we are a food company. Why not check to see if
> >> the food is rotten before it gets to the consumer?
> >
> > That's what Unstable is for.
>
> Why, if tes
On Sun, Apr 03, 2005 at 02:28:36PM +0200, Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> > It seems there are only minimal checks, so developers can unwittingly
> > upload broken packages.
>
> Any numbers where you can proof your claim? Developers are req
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> It seems there are only minimal checks, so developers can unwittingly
> upload broken packages.
Any numbers where you can proof your claim? Developers are required to test
the packages before upload, and I havent noticed any uninstallable package
in year
On Sun, Apr 03, 2005 at 02:26:34PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> On Sun, April 3, 2005 05:39, John Hasler said:
> >> For instance, let's say we are a food company. Why not check to see if
> >> the food is rotten before it gets to the consumer?
> >
> > That's what Unstable is for.
>
> Why, if tes
On Sun, April 3, 2005 05:39, John Hasler said:
>> For instance, let's say we are a food company. Why not check to see if
>> the food is rotten before it gets to the consumer?
>
> That's what Unstable is for.
Why, if tests can be automated, do we have a need to go through the
process of spreading a
Dan Jacobson writes:
> ...Debian Headquarters...
There is no such place.
> Why isn't this same apt-get check that the user does, also get done
> beforehand by the archive patrol?
The users of Unstable are the archive patrol.
> For instance, let's say we are a food company. Why not check to see
It seems there are only minimal checks, so developers can unwittingly
upload broken packages.
Wouldn't a nightly
$ for package in all_of_debian
do apt-get --print-uris install $package; done > /dev/null
2>errors_for_inspection
done at Debian Headquarters 'catch' them before they are allowed to go
11 matches
Mail list logo
