On Wed, Mar 12, 2003 at 04:26:06PM +0000, Colin Watson wrote: > On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 12:46:10AM +1100, Paul Hampson wrote: > > Bug #178060 (in libxml2) is holding libxml2 2.5.3-1 out of > > testing, compared to 2.4.24-1. > > > > The question is, since this is also true of 2.4.24-1 (I > > just checked then) would it be bad to tag this bug with > > 'sarge' as well as 'sid'? > > Well, there would be nothing technically wrong with that since the bug > exists as far back as stable.
Good. :-) > In this case I'd kind of prefer to just leave it as is so that there's > an incentive to do something about it, though, since it's so amazingly > trivial to fix (unlike the glibc bugs which require long legal > arguments, code to be rewritten, etc.). libxml2 will be held out of > testing until gcc-3.2 gets in anyway, which is a good bit more work. I think I'll submit a patch, and when gcc-3.2 gets fixed on m68k, then really start hassling. -- ----------------------------------------------------------- Paul "TBBle" Hampson, MCSE 6th year CompSci/Asian Studies student, ANU The Boss, Bubblesworth Pty Ltd (ABN: 51 095 284 361) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Of course Pacman didn't influence us as kids. If it did, we'd be running around in darkened rooms, popping pills and listening to repetitive music. -- Kristian Wilson, Nintendo, Inc, 1989 This email is licensed to the recipient for non-commercial use, duplication and distribution. -----------------------------------------------------------
pgpWTyoeiTOZf.pgp
Description: PGP signature
