[Steve Langasek] > Does this mean you think sysvinit -36 in unstable is not quite ready > for release, and that we should be looking at t-p-u for a solution > to bug #330592? Or should we be considering the unstable version > for inclusion now?
Hm, right. I guess I was not too clear. I will try to be clearer I've been waiting for comments from my co-maintainers, and no-one have said anything. I hope this mean they do not have any objections. I believe -36 in sid is a lot better than the -20 package in etch, and that it would be a lot better to support the -36 version in the next stable release of Debian. I found a solutions to the most problematic issues (rollback on the sendsigs/NFS issue to the traditional problematic behaviour instead of the new and more problematic behavoiur and make async NFS mounting optional), and believe it solve the important problems in earlier versions of sysvinit. There have not been a rush of new bugs reported against sysvinit recently, and I have fixed almost all the bugs reported since I started the bug fixing in august. So I suggest considering -36 for etch now. It svn repository is svn+ssh://svn.debian.org/svn/pkg-sysvinit/sysvinit/trunk . Friendly, -- Petter Reinholdtsen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
