On Thu, Mar 27, 2003 at 11:55:32PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> > The only problem with this is that patches that we create from the
> > buildd go automatically to the BTS.
> you mean FTBFS bug reports?
Yes.
> > The problem is that Debian bugs should never really go upstream.
> > Debian's gli
On Fri, Mar 28, 2003 at 12:18:35AM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> > we could get a list for that an generic porting discussion. where should
> > i ask for a new list of the Hurd project?
> I am happy to have such a list for discussing that topic. I just don't know
> if the savannah interface f
On Thu, Mar 27, 2003 at 11:55:32PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> we could get a list for that an generic porting discussion. where should
> i ask for a new list of the Hurd project?
I am happy to have such a list for discussing that topic. I just don't know
if the savannah interface for mailing l
On Thu, Mar 27, 2003 at 11:46:25PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> > tags for bug reports will be created when I (or some other hacker) feel the
> > need for it. How and which tags are created follows an undocumented pattern
> > that only exists in my head (and even there only vaguely).
>
> I just
On Thu, Mar 27, 2003 at 11:48:12PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2003 at 03:39:32PM +0100, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
> >
> > One should use the glibcbug utility to report bugs for offical
> > releases and to report bugs on a CVS version you send an mail to
> > libc-alpha or something
On Thu, Mar 27, 2003 at 06:59:01AM -0800, Jeff Bailey wrote:
>
> Please create a new list for that. It's bad enough that this thread is
> cross-posted, but I hang out on help-hurd so I can help newbies.
> Flooding that list with patches is likely to significantly decrease the
> likelyhood that I
On Thu, Mar 27, 2003 at 01:45:30PM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2003 at 01:33:31PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> > fine! i still like having a separate list of api-porting-related bugs in
> > debian BTS, but as Marcus said Savannah is the canonical place.
>
> I hope you aer tal
On Thu, Mar 27, 2003 at 03:39:32PM +0100, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
>
> One should use the glibcbug utility to report bugs for offical
> releases and to report bugs on a CVS version you send an mail to
> libc-alpha or something with the bug report.
yes, but we're looking for a way to have a "filter
On Thu, Mar 27, 2003 at 01:33:31PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> > help-hurd seems appropriate for general discussion of porting issues,
> > unless someone has a problem with that.
> fine for me. what if we use a tag to indicate clearly the message is a
> porting patch? eg, if we put "[ported]"
- the Glibc savannah site [1] doesn't have an entry for bugs. what do
the libc people here (Roland? :)) think about creating one?
>From the glibc project at savannah:
These pages are only for maintaining the Web pages of the GNU C
Library.
One should use the glibcbug utility to report
On Thu, Mar 27, 2003 at 01:33:31PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
[snip]
>
> fine for me. what if we use a tag to indicate clearly the message is a
> porting patch? eg, if we put "[ported]" or the like in subject it'll be
> made sure we don't forget to look at it and forward it to the respective bts
On Thu, Mar 27, 2003 at 01:33:31PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> fine! i still like having a separate list of api-porting-related bugs in
> debian BTS, but as Marcus said Savannah is the canonical place.
I hope you aer talking about bugs in the Hurd and GNU Mach (and MiG, and
whatever other compon
On Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 05:18:22PM -0500, Jon Portnoy wrote:
>
> Of course, for a while we're going to be playing some serious catch-up -
> Debian has, what? Five years of work behind their Hurd port? However
> we'd be happy to engage in mutual contributions.
well, that just means there are fiv
13 matches
Mail list logo
