ved from non-free to main.
> - some fixes for wrong-code reports from the gcc-3.3-release branch.
The only one of these fixes that sounds like a release issue is possibly the
"wrong-code reports", could you explain what these are?
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
far inferior to actually fixing the filesystem
issues, of course, but that fix is intrusive and is unlikely to be
backported to 2.6.8 in the requisite timeframe.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Tue, Feb 08, 2005 at 07:39:48PM +0100, Jean-Yves LENHOF wrote:
> Le mardi 08 février 2005 à 08:13 -0800, Steve Langasek a écrit :
> > On Mon, Feb 07, 2005 at 03:55:22PM -0500, Jay Berkenbilt wrote:
>
> > The plan is to release d-i RC3 with a 2.6.8 kernel. There are currentl
> Is this a problem with the testing scripts?
Yes (partly)
> If so, does this happen often enough to be a real problem and does it
> need fixing?
Yes, the fix is to get proper version tracking in the BTS. That's a
post-sarge item for the BTS maintainers, AIUI.
--
Steve Langase
will include checking on bugs #279374 and #285203
and fixing anything that needs to be fixed on the kaffe side to get rid of
these bugs.
Also, is #286264 still an open issue, or should it be considered closed with
the most recent upload?
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
down)
> Thanks for all the good work,
Approved.
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
push db3 through in a couple more days once we have reasonable
assurance that there are no new problems introduced by the thread
changes.
> # xview 3.2p1.4-19 needed, have 3.2p1.4-16 for DSA-672-1
> 15 days old
> missing ia64 build
Missing ia64 packages for xview are ftp.debian.org bug #271313.
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
longer in testing (removed for
precisely this bug). If you want grass to be considerd for sarge, I would
recommend that you upload a version of the package that fixes the security
bug without introducing changes that require NEW processing by ftpmasters.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern p
should go in sarge. It has been in unstable for a week.
These are both approved now.
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 05:19:45PM -0500, Steve Halasz wrote:
> On Sat, 2005-02-12 at 23:56 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 12, 2005 at 11:29:38PM -0500, Steve Halasz wrote:
> > > My sponsor suggested I write to you and request that you consider the
> > &g
proach, and have AFAICT not provided much
support to the ftp-masters for resolving this situation.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
d trying to turn you
> mad.
> The only way to stop me in that crazy loop is, I'm afraid, by
> releasing sargethis is an official threat : release sarge or I'll
> never stop until I've reached 489 languages supported and the end of
> the ISO-639 code list.
Sigh. :)
ssary RC fixes (my fault, I'm afraid).
> console-common and console-tools contain a RC bug fix needed for Greek
> to work correctly on debian-installer.
These have all been approved now and should go in tomorrow.
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Fri, Feb 11, 2005 at 12:49:28PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> The main change in this base-config are a serial console patch. Please
> review and consider letting the package into sarge.
Approved.
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
> - gettext now Recommends: curl | wget | lynx.
> - gettext.sh is now a symlink to /usr/share/gettext/gettext.sh.
> Only one .c source file has been changed, namely urlget.c, but the
> change is a one line fix to disable a block of code.
Approved.
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern
On Fri, Feb 11, 2005 at 06:21:13PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 11, 2005 at 01:08:39PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> > The list is getting a bit long so I thought I'd go through it here again:
> > # bind 1:8.4.6-1 needed, have 1:8.4.4-1 for CAN-2005-0033
can actually handle such a
package. Do you know how much build space might be saved by disabling the
testsuite for static libs on all architectures, instead of just on the
mipsen?
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
are release critical).
Approved -- and urgency bumped as well, to get this RC bugfix into sarge.
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
from a
> technical POV in order to change the priority. I mailed -release
> because I'm wondering if there are any reasons against promoting
> apt-listchanges to standard.
There are none that I was aware of, at least; has a bug been filed asking
the ftpmasters to make this overrid
ase.
This has been indicated before in past release team updates, and nothing has
changed since then which would eliminate the reasons for wanting ABI changes
to be coordinated with the release team first. Clearly, this is something
that we need to reiterate.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
d-d-a without also expecting people to go trawling wikis for info (which,
btw, is something I personally will not do).
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
empty-handed), I think
the OpenLDAP 2.2 upload should go directly to unstable according to the
(carefully considered) plan that was proposed. I'm happy to review the
packages prior to upload if you'd like.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ler is high, but there's no reason why replicator should inherit this
design flaw. As Goswin notes, cdebootstrap is a more robust solution to
your problem.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ng a build of sdl-mixer1.2 in mips :-))
sdl-mixer1.2 has been built on all archs and luola 1.2.6-1 is now in testing
together with luola-levels 5.1-2 -- I assume that means no removal is needed
now (and the RC bug should be closed)?
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Des
On Fri, Feb 25, 2005 at 01:59:35AM +0100, Torsten Landschoff wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 04:34:44PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > If it wasn't clear from my previous messages on the subject, I was speaking
> > as a release manager when I approached Snow-Man abou
On Fri, Feb 25, 2005 at 02:03:13PM -0600, Drew Scott Daniels wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 03:44:21PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 22, 2005 at 04:15:09PM -0600, Drew Scott Daniels wrote:
> > > I've started a [EMAIL PROTECTED] FAQ at
> > > http://w
is completely broken and will be removed; and php-imlib, which is
waiting on the xfree86 cleanup on arm and sparc and will be pushed out
temporarily to let php4 in.
No change on the rest, which have either gotten in on their own or are still
blocked for the same reason...
Cheers,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ge can't make it into sarge without the new version of kaffe,
which fails to build on s390. This looks like a source regression; can you
take a look at it?
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
administrator more busy. Have RMs
> good contact with responsible person?
"routine maintenance" as distinct from the need for deploying new code.
We are in contact with the wanna-build maintainers about this, as time
allows.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
een to
> be printed when installing the package from scratch.
> Would you accept the following debdiff for stable-proposed-updates?
This needs to be approved by the Stable Release Manager, Joey Schulze. I
don't know if Joey follows this list.
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek
postmod
On Sun, Feb 27, 2005 at 11:05:11PM +0100, Arnaud Vandyck wrote:
> Sat, 26 Feb 2005 22:02:04 -0800,
> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 25, 2005 at 06:43:40PM +0100, Arnaud Vandyck wrote:
> >> gjdoc (0.7.1-2) is now able to build acceptable jav
ubmitter and BTS.
> The decision is in Joeyh and the RM's hands.
As far as I'm concerned, it's entirely Joey's call. When it's possible to
work around a release-critical bug by making changes to packages outside the
installer, it is certainly acceptable that we do so if there's a need.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ther very small nor absolutely straightforward.
Is there a reason not to push the version from unstable through to testing?
That would give us the benefit of having a known tested package before it
hits testing, at least.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
currently in the archive, we aren't going to
ask the ftpmasters for special treatment for packages in NEW (and I wouldn't
expect them to listen to us if they did).
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
raged to set _POSIX2_VERSION="200112" in
> the environment, see what breaks, and fix it, as this change
> should be reverted some day after the release of sarge.
> -- Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Tue, 15 Feb 2005 22:45:18 +0100
Approved.
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek
onfiguring name_regex). I don't see any rationale for this change
in the changelog, could you explain why this was done?
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 09:47:05AM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 07:30:57AM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> > This is obviously a mistake. I'll upload a new version.
> 3.63 is now in unstable. A pity that we'll lose another ten days now.
Nah. Hinted
AIL PROTECTED] (as per instructions on debian-devel I
> think), but there was no reply and no obvious action taken.
Turnaround of signed packages tends to be slower when the buildd admins are
not at home, and the arm buildd admin has been traveling the past two
weekends (and is currently nursing a wo
explain why this is actually useful
(since no one else can think of a reason).
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
> - Forwarded message from Martin Pitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
>
> Subject: Bug#298060: Please don't install login as setuid root
> Reply-To: Martin
arm is down to a single buildd
whose chroot has only just been fixed for the xfree86-common breakage this
afternoon; and arm also has a backlog of 100+ packages that need building.
Please be patient, this is another case where local buildd admins will have
to intervene before it will be built.
--
like to ask that you override its urgency to medium so it will enter
> sarge as soon as mipsel has built it.
Done.
Cheers,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
er than telnetd?
Not afaik. Even Kerberized telnetd doesn't need it (except for backwards
compatibility).
> I'm more than willing to consider telnetd a legacy, insecure-by-design
> component for which it is justified to require a non-default configuration.
Sounds fine to me.
--
Stev
the blessing of Steve's or Colin's magic wands.
> Please give me this chance
Approved (just the package, not the plot to break sarge).
Cheers,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Hi Agustin,
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 12:47:59PM +0100, Agustin Martin wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 03, 2005 at 06:00:57PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 03, 2005 at 09:24:14AM +0100, Agustin Martin wrote:
> > > A fix for that is in unstable, for two weeks now, and I
hitectures. Re-uploading doesn't change its position in the queue, but
it *does* force buildds for all the other archs to needlessly rebuild the
package. This is why the answer to your previous email was "please be
patient".
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature
On Sat, Mar 12, 2005 at 01:23:56PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> I just don't think it's ready for stable, and I don't have the time to beat
> it into shape. #299144 has been submitted to keep it from creeping back in.
Tagged for removal.
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek
On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 05:03:55PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Re-uploading a package to provoke a buildd response is counterproductive,
> > *particularly* when the package is already in Needs-Build on the missing
&
On Sat, Mar 12, 2005 at 03:19:23PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> [Probably going a bit off track for -release; MFT to -devel]
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 07:14:35PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > The queue ordering is entirely automatic, and AIUI the queue(s) is (are)
&
nd one line in debian/rules ].
Approved.
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
According to http://buildd.debian.org/quinn-diff/Packages-arch-specific, the
package is not supposed to be tried on ia64:
%lush: !ia64 #ANAIS,
#267494
This package is merely waiting for someone on the ftp team to remove the
existing ia64 binaries.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
work better for the project, and the buildd admins *are* committed
to keeping up with the queue even though hardware circumstances sometimes
prevent it from time to time.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
may be the *quickest* way to get the package in sync
in testing. It's an ugly trade-off, but I think we've erred on the side
of caution for long enough and will probably be more aggressive with
buildd-stalled RC fixes going forward.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
st say that I'm not
enthusiastic about seeing another round of updates of this package for
sarge, particularly when it's bound up with updates of 2-3 other
packages. :)
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
It
should be possible to fix this so gnupg doesn't depend on libusb on s390, in
any case; a non-RC bug requesting that seems appropriate.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
er any sort of freeze?
Yes, we do need to have the arm buildd situation dealt with prior to freeze;
if nothing else, one of the arm buildds that's currently off-line is the one
that was set up for t-p-u autobuilding.
Cheers,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 01:47:50AM +0100, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> doc-linux 2005.02-1 (and 2005.01-1) had just the normal monthly
> changes and the latest package is now 13 days in sid. Please
> approve it for migration to testing.
Hinted.
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern p
ready added in -4)
> No one complained during the 5 months it was in unstable,
Perhaps not; but what does this change imply for users upgrading from woody?
Cheers,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
us late in the cycle. It would almost certainly have to be done
pre-freeze, for sanity's sake, but that's about it, AFAICT.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ng it in. Joey, is there any d-i deadline I need to worry about for
this? I assume that if we have a known good fix, it's not a problem for it
to not be in the d-i rc3 release, as long as it gets on the official CD
builds for sarge?
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 07:45:06PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Can you explain what the needed change was that required an SONAME bump
> > here?
> I don't know the details. I didn't call for it; it'
On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 12:05:38PM +0100, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 07:37:29PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > Hi Frank,
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 01:51:44AM +0100, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> > > Mostly translation updates and
On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 12:18:10PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 02:38:35AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 10:36:12AM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > > On Mar 18, Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > &
er
> -- Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Fri, 11 Mar 2005 19:28:38 +0100
Approved.
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
roughly for ABI changes, feel free to consider this standing
permission to upload new versions of tiff if they don't bump shlibs.
Incidentally, you may be interested to check out
http://people.debian.org/~asuffield/icheck-0.1.tar.gz ...
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
n option that takes an argument.
For that, the call should be:
while ((c = getopt(argc, argv, "dt:vi:")) != EOF) {
If you can address that, I don't see any other problems with approving this
update.
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
upload?
As long as this doesn't adversely affect alml and songwrite, this isn't a
problem; please coordinate with the maintainers of those packages prior to
upload.
Cheers,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ic, which is
> disabled for the release archs).
Both devmapper and dash are packages with RC bugs in unstable that need to
get into sarge. Joey, is there any reason for us not to push the
debs/source in immediately, and sync the udebs when the opportunity presents
itself?
--
Steve Lang
ell as usual bugfixes.
> I think it can safely enter testing.
It already has.
$ grep-excuses emacs21
emacs21 (21.3+1-8 to 21.4a-1)
Maintainer: Rob Browning
2 days old (needed 2 days)
Valid candidate
$
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
you consider "must-have"s for a release,
it's better to upload directly rather than waiting for a previous version of
the package to reach testing.
In this case, you do have a little bit of lead time before the freeze to
make another low-urgency upload after the current version of pos
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 01:25:42PM +0100, Jérôme Marant wrote:
> Quoting Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 10:59:28AM +0100, Jérôme Marant wrote:
> > > Emacs 21.4a-1 has been built in all architectures. It is basically 21.3
> > >
o wait for gtkhtml and then fix both at once.
Well, speaking as a gnucash user, I'd appreciate it if the spurious
dependencies were dropped ASAP, rather than waiting on a new library version
that might not make it out of the NEW queue before we freeze.
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern pro
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 07:11:55PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Well, speaking as a gnucash user, I'd appreciate it if the spurious
> > dependencies were dropped ASAP, rather than waiting on a new library version
>
se candidate; if the
version currently in testing isn't releasable, then we would take that into
consideration, but it should be documented in the BTS if that's the case.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 07:18:45PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Because NEW processing is a treadmill, and not a release issue except in
> > select cases.
> Right, let me be more precise about what I'm suggesting
On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 08:26:25AM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 19, 2005 at 09:39:56PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > Both devmapper and dash are packages with RC bugs in unstable that need to
> > get into sarge.
> You forget lvm2.
What RC bug does the lvm2 up
gt; incoming).
You've added lsof-2.2 (<< 4.73) to the conflicts for lsof. Is this strictly
necessary? Conflicts: << is known to be problematic for upgrades, so it
would be good to avoid it if possible.
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 10:46:36AM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 11:33:18PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > What RC bug does the lvm2 update fix? I don't see any closed RC bugs in the
> > BTS.
> #297010, it was reassigned to libc6-dev for the re
ing systems for etch; David
Nusinow seems to be enjoying the task of prototyping his rails/debbugs
system. But that's not useful for "initially submitting" anything today.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
sion that will build on arm after we get a fixed
version in testing, that's fine; but arm has never had kaffe before, so this
should not hold up the release.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 10:46:50PM +0100, Arnaud Vandyck wrote:
> Tue, 22 Mar 2005 13:00:21 -0800,
> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Arnaud, if ia64 and mipsel are fixed, can we get this uploaded *now*,
> Done ;-)
Indeed -- thanks for the quick response
Hi James,
Given that this bug is marked "grave", should gnupg 1.4.0-3 be pushed into
testing, or is there another fix we should prefer here?
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ording to the latest emails, that the same security fix is
going to cause an ABI change for the 2.4 kernels. Doing full updates of
both 2.4 and 2.6 kernels before release would push my estimate out from 1
month to 2, based on recent experience.
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern progra
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 12:18:39PM -0600, John Hasler wrote:
> I've uploaded pppconfig 2.3.11. The only changes are translations. Please
> hint it into testing.
Approved, will go in when it's aged a little.
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Desc
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 04:09:42PM +0100, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 01:35:47AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > RC3 of Debian Installer is already being finalized, with only the CD builds
> > to finish up today and tomorrow; the ABI change is being hel
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 05:07:08PM +0100, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 01:35:47AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > - Add the security fix in before sarge's release, with a change to the
> > package names to reflect the ABI change. This will probably re
On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 06:49:45PM +1100, Anibal Monsalve Salazar wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 19, 2005 at 08:22:26PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> >On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 12:29:31PM +1100, Anibal Monsalve Salazar wrote:
> >For that, the call should be:
> >
> > while ((c
ompiles on every revision of a kernel-image package, which is slightly
irritating; or failing to provide a smooth downgrade path in the event of an
ABI change that coincides with a silently broken module, which is truly
ugly. The idea of automatically recompiling modules sounds good to me, but
I still think it needs to be coupled with kernel ABI tracking to avoid the
risk of slagging the user's initrd.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
em) and 80386.
> It's all hppa machines, not just hppa64.
Then why does the libc6 preinst say that the minimum kernel is 2.4.17 for
parisc, and 2.4.19 for parisc64? If this is an error, it will need to be
reconciled before release.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
issue; only systems using the Cypress chips are known to be
affected.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 03:30:01PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
> (ignoring -release followup-to, since it affects -kernel and -boot as well)
Sorry, mailer misfire, I guess.
> On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 03:24:53 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > recompiles on every revision of a kernel-i
affected
by the autobuilder problems with t-p-u right now, so that option is open for
anything that does need to be uploaded for sarge. I'd say there's no reason
not to play with longshot-for-sarge kernel changes in unstable.
Cheers,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 10:31:27PM +0100, Norbert Tretkowski wrote:
> * Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 07:48:31AM +0100, Norbert Tretkowski wrote:
> > > The non-free code which was removed in 4.74.dfsg.1-1 should not be
> > > released with sarge. No
le packages we know of that are built in this fashion are
being blocked from testing, based on your comments.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-critical bugs about
such problems once the packages reach unstable.
> > And we also hope we can put these two packages into tasksel instead of
> > xcin(big5 only) input method.
I think tasks are also frozen for sarge now.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Fri, Mar 25, 2005 at 08:45:40AM -0700, dann frazier wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-03-24 at 19:37 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 06:22:32PM -0700, dann frazier wrote:
> > > I'm trying to decide what I want to do about the ia64 kernel ABI. I
> > >
nce the shlibs were not
updated when the new public functions were added...
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
27;s already been built on about 8 archs.
Yes, urgency bumped; will go in tomorrow (which makes it medium-high, I
guess).
Cheers,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sat, Mar 26, 2005 at 09:39:41AM -0700, LaMont Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2005 at 05:16:14PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > Additional con:
> > - depends on a newer version of e2fsprogs than we currently have in
> > testing, which requires updating roughly a half d
the
> transition into sarge.
Approved.
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 08:28:01PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > It seems to me that if a package is in NEW in order to fix a bug in
> > > testing (especially an important or higher severity bug), then we
> >
901 - 1000 of 3385 matches
Mail list logo
