On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 08:27:10 +0200, Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 22:40:15 -0700, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 30, 2007 at 01:13:48AM -0400, Tim Hull wrote:
>>> Isn't this why the testing security team was formed, to address
>>> situations where there needs to be security fixes for testing like
>>> this? Is it still operational? If so, I'm just curious if they
>>> need help
>>
>> Sure. Feel free to fix gcc on mips and mipsel so that it's capable
>> of building xulrunner again.
> I still kind of fail to see a reason for holding back security fixes
> for the mainstream because of obscure failures on doorstep
> architectures. If this becomes the norm, then our broad architecture
> support becomes one of Debian's main _dis_advantages.
I think that security changes make their way into unstable
quickly enough. Remember, the primary goal for testing is to help
Debian create Lenny; and thus security support for it is not at the
level we provide for long term distributions like stable, or Sid (which
is where the bulk of Debian development happens).
Now, if we were preventing uploads into Sid, I would be more
concerned. Lenny is not something I feel the itch to strongly support
so far from its release.
manoj
--
Abandon the search for Truth; settle for a good fantasy.
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
