Hi Julien,
thank you for your quick reply!
Quoting Julien Cristau (2023-09-28 17:49:51)
> I guess more than mixing two different things I disagree that that is
> debootstrap's responsibility, and so I disagree that that is a valid bug. In
> my view it's more important for debootstrap to reliably
On 2023-09-28 20:58, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> Control: tags -1 confirmed
>
> On Wed, 2023-09-27 at 23:47 +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > The upstream glibc stable branch got a few fixes since the latest
> > point
> > released, including two security fixes.
> >
>
> Please go ahead.
>
Thanks fo
Control: tags -1 confirmed
On Wed, 2023-09-27 at 23:47 +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> The upstream glibc stable branch got a few fixes since the latest
> point
> released, including two security fixes.
>
Please go ahead.
Regards,
Adam
On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 12:42:27PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> El 28/9/23 a las 11:50, Julien Cristau escribió:
> > I still think that is absolutely the wrong thing to do, and makes
> > debootstrap more fragile for no good reason.
>
> Julien, I believe you are mixing two different things here.
>
El 28/9/23 a las 11:50, Julien Cristau escribió:
I still think that is absolutely the wrong thing to do, and makes
debootstrap more fragile for no good reason.
Julien, I believe you are mixing two different things here.
(A) What this bug is really about.
(B) What the effect of the bug is.
Th
Hi,
I still think that is absolutely the wrong thing to do, and makes
debootstrap more fragile for no good reason. If you think a particular
package shouldn't be priority:required then file a bug against
ftp.debian.org to change it.
Cheers,
Julien
On Sat, Sep 23, 2023 at 20:13:45 +0200, Johanne
6 matches
Mail list logo
