On Tuesday 08 September 2009, Marco d'Itri wrote: > On Sep 08, Frans Pop <elen...@planet.nl> wrote: > > - upload a new version of qcontrol to follow udev > > Probably the simplest option. I strongly doubt there are any other > > users of the persistent device name. > > Probably the best solution, since I just backported an upstream bug fix > (that name with a missing component was broken and should not have been > used in the first place).
True, but changing supposedly persistent (and thus stable) device names in the middle of a stable release really is not very nice. Especially when you know (well, assuming perfect memory ;-) that the device name in question is being used and changing it is known to break another package. I'll happily assume that you did simply forget or overlooked that fact when preparing the upload, but it would still be nice if you could keep this in mind for future stable udev updates. I agree that at this point an update qcontrol is the most obvious solution. I'll wait for confirmation from SRM before preparing an upload. Cheers, FJP -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
