Adrian Bunk:
> [ fullquote adding -ports, for people not following -release or -devel ]
>
> [...]
>
> Is https://release.debian.org/stretch/arch_qualify.html the up-to-date
> information available to you, and the "candidate" line how a decision
> would look like based on the current information?
[ fullquote adding -ports, for people not following -release or -devel ]
On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 06:35:07PM +0100, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am arranging the final architecture qualification meeting for Stretch.
> This is primarily of interest to the release team, but I will also take
On Mon, 4 Jun 2012 15:37:14 +0200
Holger Levsen wrote:
> > No, this time the work is based on the DDE framework, recently
> > successfully implemented for network drivers. Ask Samuel Thibault
> > for more details if interested, he is the person in charge. BTW:
> > USB support might also be possib
On Montag, 4. Juni 2012, Svante Signell wrote:
> Do you mean gnome3 and KDE4/5 here, or maybe DRM?
DRM
> No, this time the work is based on the DDE framework, recently
> successfully implemented for network drivers. Ask Samuel Thibault for
> more details if interested, he is the person in charge
On Mon, 2012-06-04 at 13:23 +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Montag, 4. Juni 2012, Svante Signell wrote:
> > One issue is how to encourage more people trying Hurd out, when it is
> > not in testing.
>
> I honestly don't think that's the main blocker trying out hurd. Lack of SATA,
> and U
On Sat, Jun 02, 2012 at 12:22:14AM +0200, Svante Signell wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-05-31 at 16:18 +0200, Svante Signell wrote:
> > From the one of the porters side, this would be a _very_ good solution
> > indeed! If GNU/Hurd enters som kind of testing status, the number of
> > users and contributors w
Hi,
On Montag, 4. Juni 2012, Svante Signell wrote:
> One issue is how to encourage more people trying Hurd out, when it is
> not in testing.
I honestly don't think that's the main blocker trying out hurd. Lack of SATA,
and USB support are the blocker, I think. And probably also missing meaningfu
On Mon, 2012-06-04 at 10:56 +0100, Neil McGovern wrote:
> > I assume this is not a regular mail correspondence, is it?
> >
>
> I generally consider it polite to give people an opportunity to respond
> before assuming that you're being ignored, especially if it's part of a
> longer thread.
Mayb
On 6/1/12, Michael Banck wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 04:18:30PM +0200, Svante Signell wrote:
>> On 28/05/12 01:52, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
>> > On 29/05/12 19:57, Andreas Barth wrote:
>> > > [...] we add hurd-i386 to testing with
>> > > break/fucked, but we don't expect it to make t
Hi,
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 04:18:30PM +0200, Svante Signell wrote:
> On 28/05/12 01:52, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> > On 29/05/12 19:57, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > > [...] we add hurd-i386 to testing with
> > > break/fucked, but we don't expect it to make the release. I.e. bugs
> > > for hurd-i386
On Thu, 2012-05-31 at 16:18 +0200, Svante Signell wrote:
> On 28/05/12 01:52, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> > On 29/05/12 19:57, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > > [...] we add hurd-i386 to testing with
> > > break/fucked, but we don't expect it to make the release. I.e. bugs
> > > for hurd-i386 are not RC.
On 28/05/12 01:52, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> On 29/05/12 19:57, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > [...] we add hurd-i386 to testing with
> > break/fucked, but we don't expect it to make the release. I.e. bugs
> > for hurd-i386 are not RC.
>
> Maybe that's all that's needed?
>
> The recent enthusiasm sou
On 30/05/12 13:10, Philipp Kern wrote:
> I wonder how that makes a difference, even psychologically. We don't mail
> failed builds for hurd-i386 to maintainers for example.
Actually, when looking into kfreebsd-* issues, I find it very helpful to
see hurd-i386 on buildd.d.o, along with log excerpts
Philipp Kern, le Wed 30 May 2012 14:10:02 +0200, a écrit :
> On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 12:01:21PM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > What is a problem is not appearing on buildd.debian.org. That makes
> > maintainers way less receptive to patches or even fix their package
> > themselves.
>
> I wonder
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 12:01:21PM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> What is a problem is not appearing on buildd.debian.org. That makes
> maintainers way less receptive to patches or even fix their package
> themselves.
I wonder how that makes a difference, even psychologically. We don't mail
faile
Joerg Jaspert, le Tue 29 May 2012 09:02:32 +0200, a écrit :
> There is only one thing I would agree on: If the RT decides to not
> include them in wheezy but add them to wheezy+1 right after wheezy is
> released (so we would be doing it during the process) and keep them
> there for the next release
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 09:02:32 +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> - hurd can come back into the main archive following the usual archive
> qualification every other new addition has to follow. Clean, simple,
> straight forward.
Not completely sure about the "simple, straight forward" part, if it
On 12861 March 1977, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>>There's a related question, which I just realised wasn't actually
>>explicit - does it make sense to add an architecture to testing at this
>>stage of the process which we don't think is releasable? My memory of
>>previous discussions is that the gener
18 matches
Mail list logo
