On Mon, 2003-09-22 at 23:58, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> It is a problem for us to ship binary packages that we cannot build. What
> happens if we needed to do an urgent update on this package (e.g.,
> security)? Or if a user needs to patch and rebuild it?
>From what I recall, fixing libstdc++3 to b
>Testing in its current state has potential to be more unstable than
>sid, has already been, and will be again if the process does not
>evolve. My idea to work around it is expressed above, but I'm quite
>sure I overlooked some things - as the problems I describe were
>overlooked originally.
I'm
>2. if 1.23-x is in sid, and a fix for 1.22 is required for woody, then
>it cannot be done correctly, as the new package should go through sid,
>and this wouldn't be possible. Even if we bump the epoch to get
>1:1.22-5 >> 1.23-1, then the people running sid would get a problem
>because their 1.23
>Should I do a source upload of 2.2.24 boot-floppies for the ARM stuff?
Yes please.
p.
>Do you advertise your CD set as "2.2r2", or just "2.2"? I think
>the latter would be accurate enough, and should help to avoid
>complaints from your customers that your CDs are too old.
Perhaps it would help for someone to produce a "2.2r0 - 2.2r3 upgrade kit"
image that could be burned onto a s
>I'm building 2.2.19 kernels for ARM at the moment. This will probably take
>most of the afternoon, but if all goes well I will do potato boot-floppies
>next.
The netwinder kernel image didn't build properly, and I wasn't able to fix it
in time to make the boot-floppies. I've uploaded the Ris
> 1. boot-floppies for powerpc are promised but still missing. BenC
> has uploaded a set for sparc, so we have ia32 and sparc right
> now. m68k and arm won't appear soon,
I'm building 2.2.19 kernels for ARM at the moment. This will probably take
most of the afternoon, but if all goes
Apropos this:
>gcc stable1:2.95.2-13alpha, i386, powerpc, sparc
>gcc stable1:2.95.2-13.1 arm, m68k
>gcc updates 1:2.95.2-13.1 sparc
>
> Changelog says "NMU\nAdd new patch for ARM" though this is an
> upload for sparc and arm is already in stable.
There are a handful of recently-built packages for ARM where the same version
is required in both potato and woody. (This happens for long-term-unbuildable
packages that have been broken because of some external factor since before
potato was frozen.)
It doesn't work to upload the same packa
9 matches
Mail list logo
