With the release of d-i pre-RC2, it is now possible to rebuild exim4
against libgnutls11 without rendering the current d-i images unusable.
Once exim4 has been rebuilt against libgnutls11 and has propagated to
testing, it is possible to have libgnutls10 removed from debootstrap's
package list.
If the exim4 maintainers don't have for an upload to fix this library
dependency right now, I'm willing to NMU. Also, the libgnutls11
maintainer has also been in an NMUing mood lately, and would probably be
equally as willing if he's available. :-)
Adding the fix for 273505 (Ukrainian
Adding the fix for 273505 (Ukrainian translation, the only pending
translation ATM) would be deeply appreciated by the i18n team
I notified the translators for the few missing languages that they
have a very short window for sending translations.
Do not wait for them. I told them they have
peter green wrote:
what about changing the 486 emulation kernel patch so that it completely
disables itself on non 386 processors
Did you read the patch? I thougth that was already the case from how
it is invoked.
this way it would only have security issues on pure 386 which wouldn't be
Jesus Climent wrote:
Package: kernel-patch-powerpc
Version: N/A; reported 2004-10-04
Severity: normal
How can this be suggested on an official packaged kernel?
* To change the built-in command line on a PReP system, run mkvmlinuz
and then open the vmlinuz file with a binary editor
Steve Langasek wrote:
On Fri, Oct 01, 2004 at 01:07:25PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
So I produced a kernel intended for the upgrade-i386 directory.
See http://lists.debian.org/debian-kernel/2004/08/msg02087.html
I wanted it to be tested, but nobody has paid any attention. I don't
On Sun, Oct 03, 2004 at 07:03:50PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
* Adrian Bunk ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041003 17:10]:
On Sun, Oct 03, 2004 at 12:44:21PM +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
You certainly have a good point here. I'm not suggesting to remove
Recommends; I think the concept of
On Tue, Oct 05, 2004 at 09:24:21PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
The release policy states: Packages in main cannot require any software
outside of main for execution or compilation. A recommendation is not a
requirement; I don't believe that unfulfillable Recommends are not
release-critical.
On Sun, Oct 03, 2004 at 10:44:25PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
there are AFAICS three topics where there was/is some discussion whether
they are really RC or not, and where IMHO an editorial clarification
would be good (in whichever direction the clarification is).
Clarified as follows:
+
Hi,
Andreas Barth wrote:
+ is it ok if a source package in main build packages in main and
contrib? I think this is not allowed (but I'm not so convinced here,
perhaps this is sarge-ignore), but there was some discussion on IRC
whether this is actually covered by #4 of our RC-policy or
On Tue, Oct 05, 2004 at 09:26:24PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
On Tue, Oct 05, 2004 at 09:24:21PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
The release policy states: Packages in main cannot require any software
outside of main for execution or compilation. A recommendation is not a
requirement; I don't
On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 12:37:25AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
On Tue, Oct 05, 2004 at 09:26:24PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
On Tue, Oct 05, 2004 at 09:24:21PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
The release policy states: Packages in main cannot require any software
outside of main for
12 matches
Mail list logo
