On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 12:17:29AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: > On Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 03:53:39PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 09:07:42PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > > > On Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 10:07:03AM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > > > > A great deal of work has been done in this area. See > > > > http://bugs.debian.org/203741 for information. It would be great > > > > if you would like to help with this. > > > > > > Has the patch been integrated into CVS? I think so (but the bug > > > report doesn't say so explicitly). > > > > No, it hasn't, because I'm trying to get a new apt into testing, and > > introducing a lot of new code like this usually doesn't help. I was > > hoping to have a new apt safely in testing by now, and to be able to > > put this into unstable and start getting testing for it, but since > > glibc and gcc-3.3 held up apt's progress into testing for so long, > > this has been problematic. > > If the code is otherwise ready, you could drop it into experimental. > This is probably the best approach if you think it could be ready for > sarge.
I really don't think it could be ready for sarge. I am moving cross-country starting next week, and so will not be around to handle problems that arise, even if a sufficient number of people try the package from experimental. It'd be nice if someone else wanted to step up to help with that; as I recall, you said you wouldn't be able to do much in the near future. I've recorded my ideas about the current status of things in the BTS (#203741). I've added a default keyring to the mix, so the upgrade path is smooth. It needs a couple of small things, but I think it's ready for much broader testing. I've been keeping it in sync with the other changes I've made to apt recently. -- - mdz
