Thomas Goirand wrote: > Vincent Danjean wrote: >> 3) perhaps, try to push what is available in lenny backport into a >> point-release >> of lenny. This will depends on how many bug fix are present, how intrusive >> the changes are, the release maintainers opinion, ... >> >> For me, 3 is not the more important. Work on yum/rpm should have been done >> earlier to be added in lenny. So you should mainly ensure that squeeze will >> be in good shape with respect to yum/rpm. And backports is here for lenny >> users if they really needed it. >> >> Regards, >> Vincent > > I do agree with you. I even posted on the BTS the URL of GPLHost's own > Debian repository that I manage so there is a workable solution NOW. > > My employee, which know python a lot better than me, is working on a > patch. I'm not sure we will be able to have it working without > python-iniparse, but we will try. > > That being said, if we can't have a working yum without new python > modules, I do insist: yum shall be REMOVED from Lenny, as it's BROKEN.
I guess we should investigate if we can have a working yum without new python modules. > More about this later on, after Manuel's python work on the package. Ok, thanks already for looking into it. Cheers Luk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
