Re: Architecture qualification

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

Re: removing "su" from coreutils [Re: Fwd: [PULL] su

Hi! On Fri, 25 May 2012 11:26:00 +0200, I wrote: > On Thu, 24 May 2012 15:21:01 +0200, Jim Meyering wrote: > > Pádraig Brady wrote: > > > Original Message > > > Subject: [PULL] su > > > Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 14:58:01 +0200 > > > From: Ludwig Nussel > > > To: util-li...@vger.ke

Re: removing "su" from coreutils [Re: Fwd: [PULL] su

Hi! On Tue, 29 May 2012 11:50:25 +0200, I wrote: > On Fri, 25 May 2012 11:26:00 +0200, I wrote: > > On Thu, 24 May 2012 15:21:01 +0200, Jim Meyering wrote: > > > Pádraig Brady wrote: > > > > Original Message > > > > Subject: [PULL] su > > > > Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 14:58:01 +020

Re: removing "su" from coreutils [Re: Fwd: [PULL] su

On 05/29/2012 10:50 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > A minor portability patch was all that was needed, > , > and all that has now been merged to util-linux. > > How to coordinate this with

Re: Architecture qualification

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

Re: hurd-i386 qualification for Wheezy

Ansgar Burchardt, le Mon 28 May 2012 13:10:32 +0200, a écrit : > Samuel Thibault writes: > > - We are rebuiding the archive without debian-ports, it should be over > > before the end of May. debian-ports now only contains packages helpful > > for users; it is no longer used by the buildds since th