On Tue, 18 Nov 2003, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> Your point being?
That Nathanael's list is missing one important subsystem.
> From reading debian-x I got the firm impression that we'll have 4.3.0
> in sarge (unless our time estimates are completely off and sarge wil
> be released in June).
Is it
On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 10:54:00PM +0100, Yann Dirson wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 07:29:29PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > There are some good suggestions in your proposal, e.g. you suggest to
> > check whether the build dependencies are fulfilled. The lack of checking
> > for build dependen
Scripsit Yann Dirson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> But that last point raises another issue: does anyone really use
> testing ? Would anyone use pre-testing after all ?
I think very many people use stable plus bits and pieces from
testing. I have two machines set up that way. Getting the bits and
pieces
On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 10:15:25AM -0700, Andre Lehovich wrote:
> xfree86 4.1.3: still in experimental, adds support for a
> bunch of important video chipsets, including most new
> laptops. Upstream 4.1.4 is advertised to release 15
> December.
Your point being?
From reading debian-x I got the
On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 07:29:29PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> There are some good suggestions in your proposal, e.g. you suggest to
> check whether the build dependencies are fulfilled. The lack of checking
> for build dependencies in the current testing scripts often leads to
> packages in tes
Neil Schemenauer wrote:
> Say 'A' depends on 'B' with a matching version number. In testing
> we have:
>
> A_1 B_1
>
> and in unstable:
>
> A_1 B_2
>
> We can't move B into testing since it's waiting for A. Now someone
> uploads a new version of B,
>
> A_1 B_3
>
> and shortly af
On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 05:47:44PM +0100, Yann Dirson wrote:
> Joey wrote:
> >Packages in unstable have dependencies in unstable which may not be
> >met in testing, hence they cannot simply be included in testing.
> >Unfortunately we need to take care of this.
>
> I've come up at least once with a
xfree86 4.1.3: still in experimental, adds support for a
bunch of important video chipsets, including most new
laptops. Upstream 4.1.4 is advertised to release 15
December.
--Andre, raining on the parade
Joey wrote:
>Packages in unstable have dependencies in unstable which may not be
>met in testing, hence they cannot simply be included in testing.
>Unfortunately we need to take care of this.
I've come up at least once with a suggestion on how we could avoid this
problem and increase the throughpu
On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 09:40:35AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> do we have a period in the release cycle, where no new versions enter
> unstable, so that packages depending on other packages can catch up?
> something like a bug fixing upload period only?
I had another idea. In my spare time I'v
Investors: Come see Wall Streets only scale-trading system for blue-chip stocks
- MainScale
We DO NOT TOUT INDIVIDUAL STOCKS - This is an automated, stock-trading system
for blue-chips only
www.mainscale4u.com/?032335
MainScale started on October 1, 2002
Here are the results our investors h
Steve Langasek writes:
> Oh, well, I think there are at least a few people who would mind if we
> released with a completely broken set of php4 packages. But this is
> trivial to fix once perl is in.
do we have a period in the release cycle, where no new versions enter
unstable, so that packages
On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 12:29:28AM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> GNOME 2: All the libraries need to pass their 10-day wait times, and then
> most of it should go in at once, probably leaving only a couple of packages
> to fix.
orbit2, libbonobo, it looks like. So this should be ready to go i
13 matches
Mail list logo
