Roman Zippel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Mon, 16 Oct 2006, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > >> > I'm not sure what you intent with this question. The patch is not that >> > old yet, but it's there: >> > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=326905 >> >> Wow, that's rich. The patch was posted to the bug log all of THIRTY >> MINUTES before your message here, and AFTER my email. >> >> So this nonsense of "fixes are just stuck in the BTS" is still >> nonsense. > > Look closer, so your whole intention was to distract from the real issues > and just insult whose who want to help? Indeed, that's rich. :-(
You claimed that it's a bad idea to drop m68k as a release candidate, because the only way bugs will get fixed is if maintainers are forced to include patches. In fact, the one m68k porting problem that affects packages I am concerned with has lied dormant for a year, until today. Your message was deliberately misleading, designed to suggest that there had been a fix in for a while (even if "not that old yet"), when in fact, the patch was posted *after* my message. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
