Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Horms
* Package name: perdition-pbs
Version : 1.0.0
Upstream Author : Simon Horman
* URL : http://www.vergenet.net/linux/perdition/pbs.shtml
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: C
Description : POP / IMAP Before
portion of the usebase before 2.4 gets pulled.
In other words, if there are people using 2.4 for s390,
and 2.6 doesn't work, then removal of 2.4 is unlikely.
I believe this is the current status. Though perhaps
we can work towards changing it.
--
Horms
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL P
upstream branch was rotting and not worth
> including. Is there really a reason to think it will be in *better*
> shape for etch?
If its abandonded upstream, I would guess not.
--
Horms
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ld be very convenient for me to keep
2.4.27 around for i386. Though I'm not really concerend about
being able to install 2.4.27, just have something to test, so
I guess that doesn't have to be a package that appears in Debian.
But if I'm building the things, it seems like it might as
f the patches if they will be accepted
> for Sarge.
I am fairly dubious about being able to do non-security updates to sarge.
Rather I think volatile might be the best avenue for these kind of fixes.
--
Horms
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
arant
supporting 2.4 across the board. And in the case of the latter, by the
time etch comes out, 2.6 will have progressed and along the way should
become more and more solid. So in all respects it would seem better to
focus on 2.6.
--
Horms
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 11:39:59AM +0100, Jon Dowland wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 07:20:36PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 11:42:39AM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
> > > On Mon, 04 Jul 2005, Marc Haber wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Mon, J
rnel is still in wide spread use
both indide and outside Debian, thats a cause for being concerned
about it in my books.
--
Horms
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 11:44:23AM +0200, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
> Horms wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 11:12:21AM +0200, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
> > > Otavio Salvador wrote:
> > > > Thiemo Seufer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > >
e that as, we need to discuss if 2.4 should be included
in etch. My understanding is that it is needed for some arches,
and my personal feeling is that 2.4 is maintained upstream and in
many cases is a valid choice over 2.6. That said, I think its a
discussion that should be had and I am more
e
one of those people and have a reason to undo this change, please do so,
I have no ambitions to tread on your toes.
--
Horms
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
y vulnerabilities, but another set of
> kernel-source packages are on their way.
In Friday kernel-source-2.4.27 2.4.27-8 was released which
should address the major outstanding issues with 2.4 and provide
a base for us to work on. 2.4.27-8 kernel images for i386
were also made available on Fri
s released.
Also if anyone has backports from 2.4.28 I would be happy to consider
them for 2.4.27.
--
Horms
public exposure of something is *not* good enough for
> > real use, and I find it hard to imagine 14 months going by without any
> > fixes or improvements (or, frankly, security issues, it is a network
> > tool :-)
>
> I happen to know Horms has done some work on it,
14 matches
Mail list logo
