Adam Di Carlo...
> Note: I haven't heard *one* *word* from ARM guys since I got that one
> patch months ago. No patches, no communication. They are succeeding
> at pissing me off.
If you would screw us up we would have to complain, but everything
is working just fine. (Well up until I accidental
J.A. Bezemer wrote:
> Update: I've received reports that everything except ARM floppies, apt 0.3.19
> and upgrade-stuff is okay at this moment. Maybe you can skip apt for the
> moment (but then SAY it, so we'll not be waiting for something that won't
> happen.)
Why exactly do you think that a new
On Mon, 15 May 2000, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > If you don't mind not making more pointless, needless changes, please use
> > potato/updates not potato/security, then things will work fine when you
> > add the stable symlink.
>
> Heh, okay. Renamed & a symlin
[added -boot and -x to the cc list]
> It sure would be nice if after a fresh install, I could be up and
> running with a fully functional X configuration, complete with Gnome
> and a decent window-manager.
that is the intention.
> Not everything needed is installed, I've found, using the `si
Please let me know at least 4 days in advance (more if possible) when
you intend to start the next test cycle.
It's obvious that we do need another cycle. We need a release kernel,
not a a pre-release kernel. We need to fix some rather nasty problems
in boot-floppies (2.2.15), which needs some
Richard Braakman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > arm ???
> > - floppies ???
> > ARM will not release with 2.2 as there is no way to install it.
> > Maybe 2.2.1 if people are providing boot-stuff.
>
> Yes, they are rather late with their boot-floppies. But I see
> 2.2.14 ones for ARM in Incomin
This is a tough call, but I suggest that it may result in a net saving of
time to abandon the current test cycle. We know, for example, that the
kernel is going to have to be changed before release, first because it is
bad on general principles to release on the 2.2.15pre20 kernel instead of
the o
If I were in your position, I would probably feel the same way. However,
everyone is working toward the same goal, despite some differences of
opinion about how to get there. Let's just figure out the best way to
move a high-quality potato to release, and there will sighs of relief all
around. I
On Mon, 15 May 2000, Richard Braakman wrote:
> On Mon, May 15, 2000 at 04:49:54PM +0200, J.A. Bezemer wrote:
> > Okay. Will a developer-signed "fake" .changes file with md5sum of the
> > upgrade-all.tar do? Does it have to be placed in Incoming (on ftp-master I
> > guess) or can you just fetch it
On Mon, May 15, 2000 at 04:49:54PM +0200, J.A. Bezemer wrote:
> Okay. Will a developer-signed "fake" .changes file with md5sum of the
> upgrade-all.tar do? Does it have to be placed in Incoming (on ftp-master I
> guess) or can you just fetch it from my website?
Yes, that will do. I can fetch it,
On Mon, May 15, 2000 at 08:33:41PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> So my opinion is that the test cycle should end now, and we should start
> preparing for the next test cycle by fixing lots and lots[1] of RC bugs,
> and finishing up internal testing of boot-floppies and CD images.
That was the plan f
On Sun, May 14, 2000 at 10:30:11PM -0700, Jim Lynch wrote:
> Summary of this note: OK, you don't want to go back to an unfrozen state,
> you just want to cancel the current test cycle. I don't. It's not yet out
> of the prep phase. It will be when cd images for the test phase are
> officially avai
On Mon, 15 May 2000, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Le Mon, May 15, 2000 at 01:53:52PM +0200, Richard Braakman écrivait:
> > That's a bit of a Catch-22, because everyone else is WAITING for the CD
> > images.
> >
> > > This is my current WaitingFor list: (comments are welcome!)
> >
> > My first comm
Previously Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> If you don't mind not making more pointless, needless changes, please use
> potato/updates not potato/security, then things will work fine when you
> add the stable symlink.
Heh, okay. Renamed & a symlink added so both will work now.
Wichert.
--
___
On Mon, 15 May 2000, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Appropriate line for apt is:
>
>deb http://security.debian.org/ potato/security main contrib non-free
If you don't mind not making more pointless, needless changes, please use
potato/updates not potato/security, then things will work fine when
On Mon, May 15, 2000 at 04:49:54PM +0200, J.A. Bezemer wrote:
> libc6/ppc is broken according to
> http://www.debian.org/Lists-Archives/debian-release-0005/msg00024.html
> "This breaks dependencies on almost everything."
> but I don't know (not Confirmed) if this has been fixed already.
Actual
On Mon, 15 May 2000, Richard Braakman wrote:
> On Mon, May 15, 2000 at 09:14:54AM +0200, J.A. Bezemer wrote:
> > On Sun, 14 May 2000, Josip Rodin wrote:
> > > All boot-floppies are ready (except ARM, but that's an opaque thing :),
> > > and
> > > the CD images have been created. So, we can test
Le Mon, May 15, 2000 at 01:53:52PM +0200, Richard Braakman écrivait:
> That's a bit of a Catch-22, because everyone else is WAITING for the CD
> images.
>
> > This is my current WaitingFor list: (comments are welcome!)
>
> My first comment is that this is the first I've heard of this list.
As r
Title: RE: Formal objection: Changing how the testing of potato works would invalidate the whole test. So please don't change it.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, May 15, 2000 2:26 AM
To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org; debian-release
Since no packages are being installed during the testing cycle
I have started to add security fixes for potato to security.debian.org.
I'm not going to recompile everything on there myself, so for now
only i386 packages are present.
Appropriate line for apt is:
deb http://security.debian.org/
On Mon, May 15, 2000 at 09:14:54AM +0200, J.A. Bezemer wrote:
> On Sun, 14 May 2000, Josip Rodin wrote:
> > All boot-floppies are ready (except ARM, but that's an opaque thing :), and
> > the CD images have been created. So, we can test potato installation and
> > upgrade with those.
>
> As advert
It sure would be nice if after a fresh install, I could be up and
running with a fully functional X configuration, complete with Gnome
and a decent window-manager.
Not everything needed is installed, I've found, using the `simple'
method and the task packages.
Another problem is that once
On Sun, 14 May 2000, Josip Rodin wrote:
[...]
>
> All boot-floppies are ready (except ARM, but that's an opaque thing :), and
> the CD images have been created. So, we can test potato installation and
> upgrade with those.
As advertised on cdimage.debian.org, there are (still) _NO_ official CD
Hmmm... so we should not test Potato for doneness with a fork?
Summary of my position on this:
1. The final release of potato needs to have the Adaptec SCSI bug fixed.
2. If no one is yet testing in the present test cycle because there are no
official images to use, then I say we might as well fix the bug now before
effectively starting the test cycle.
3. I
Hi Josip,
Summary of this note: OK, you don't want to go back to an unfrozen state,
you just want to cancel the current test cycle. I don't. It's not yet out
of the prep phase. It will be when cd images for the test phase are
officially available. Once they become available, they get released
ab
26 matches
Mail list logo
