I agree with Scott's assessment, although I would note that Debian *does* have
a suite that addresses the needs of Bitcoin: stable-updates. Mandatory
protocol rule changes would seem to fall within the "broken by the flow of
time" category. Thoughts?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc
Also, note the backport branches have a policy of only including fixes which
have been first merged to the master branch.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
On Wednesday, September 04, 2013 4:58:58 PM Scott Howard wrote:
> How are those updated? It appears whenever there is a current-version
> micro-release, those commits are backported to the stable branches.
I have a lot of different projects, and tend to cycle through them. Outside of
that routine
This isn't correct. We do support backported/stable versions in a separate git
repository:
https://gitorious.org/bitcoin/bitcoind-stable/
Debian is welcome to choose a branch and I will do what I can to ensure it
receives long-term support. I would recommend using the latest release
(cu
On Tuesday, March 27, 2012 2:00:52 PM Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Being old is not a bug in itself, however: Please file individual
> bugreports for each, well, bug, instead of a single giant one. That's
> much easier to handle.
Being unmaintained means there is nobody tracking which bugs affect it
To address the mips/powerpc/s390/sparc/sparc64 concerns...
bitcoind has never been supported on big-endian architectures, even in 0.3.x,
and even if it used to build, there's almost no chance it works at all.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject o
6 matches
Mail list logo
