On 30/05/12 10:54, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> We can as well not aim at an official release, and make an unofficial
> release. In my opinion that'd be already great.
Sounds good, I'd love for hurd-i386 to be able to go through the motions
of a release even if it's not part of the official one.
Ide
Adam D. Barratt, le Sat 19 May 2012 19:04:40 +0100, a écrit :
> I'm not sure we've ever released with an architecture which was in
> either broken or fucked, but hopefully someone will correct me if I'm
> mistaken on that.
We can as well not aim at an official release, and make an unofficial
relea
On Wed, 2012-05-30 at 11:34 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Svante Signell, le Wed 30 May 2012 11:31:24 +0200, a écrit :
> > On Wed, 2012-05-30 at 11:23 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > > Svante Signell, le Wed 30 May 2012 11:14:24 +0200, a écrit :
> > > > > * its archive coverage is far lower tha
Svante Signell, le Wed 30 May 2012 11:31:24 +0200, a écrit :
> On Wed, 2012-05-30 at 11:23 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Svante Signell, le Wed 30 May 2012 11:14:24 +0200, a écrit :
> > > > * its archive coverage is far lower than required
> > >
> > > What is required, currently the percentage
On Wed, 2012-05-30 at 11:23 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Svante Signell, le Wed 30 May 2012 11:14:24 +0200, a écrit :
> > > * its archive coverage is far lower than required
> >
> > What is required, currently the percentage is 77%.
>
> No, it is rather 76%.
It would be interesting to know ho
Svante Signell, le Wed 30 May 2012 11:14:24 +0200, a écrit :
> > * its archive coverage is far lower than required
>
> What is required, currently the percentage is 77%.
No, it is rather 76%.
> How large was it when kFreeBSD was released as a tech preview in
> Squeeze.
Simple, see the graph at
On Wed, 2012-05-30 at 09:53 +0100, Neil McGovern wrote:
> On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 06:08:16PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > On 19.05.2012 19:04, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > >I'm not sure we've ever released with an architecture which was in
> > >either broken or fucked, but hopefully someone will
Neil McGovern, le Wed 30 May 2012 09:53:53 +0100, a écrit :
> In order to release hurd, even as a tech preview, we need hurd in
> testing and users actually testing it. This is a problem at this stage
> because:
> * there isn't a functional D-I port yet
?? It is functional. The last bug I was seei
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 06:08:16PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On 19.05.2012 19:04, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> >I'm not sure we've ever released with an architecture which was in
> >either broken or fucked, but hopefully someone will correct me if I'm
> >mistaken on that.
>
> Anyone? :-)
>
> Op
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
Hi,
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 the archive
> rebuild started.
I keep track of packages that were n
On Thu, 2012-05-24 at 19:35 +0200, Svante Signell wrote:
> Looks like group reply in my mailer means reply only to the mailing list
> I have defined a filter for? Anyway, forwarding to debian-release too.
*checks headers* You wanted "reply all", predictably enough. Which
means this is now annoyi
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 07:35:27PM +0200, Svante Signell wrote:
> Is there a definition of what broken and fucked means, so this could be
> related to. Also, is "tech preview" defined somewhere. Were there any
> descriptions made/discussions when kFreeBSD was introduced for Squeeze?
Yes. c.f. http
Looks like group reply in my mailer means reply only to the mailing list
I have defined a filter for? Anyway, forwarding to debian-release too.
Forwarded Message
From: Svante Signell
Reply-to: Svante Signell
To: debian-h...@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: hurd-i386 qualification
On 19.05.2012 19:04, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
Very quickly following up on a possible nomenclature issue and a
couple
of other things.
On Sat, 2012-05-19 at 17:29 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
- We of course aim at tech preview for wheezy only, not a full
release. Our goal is to establish a test
On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 08:20:13PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> For security updates (i.e. after release), we need two DSAed buildds.
> Having DSAed buildds allows also to do autosigning, which shortens the
> time span for getting builds into the archive. This isn't strictly
> required, but not do
On 19.05.2012 23:59, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Cyril Brulebois, le Sat 19 May 2012 19:41:56 +0200, a écrit :
>> (Ewww, long lines)
>
> Oops, sorry, I forgot to reindent after import from the pad.
>
>> Samuel Thibault (19/05/2012):
>>> - We of course aim at tech preview for wheezy only
Hello,
Cyril Brulebois, le Sat 19 May 2012 19:41:56 +0200, a écrit :
> (Ewww, long lines)
Oops, sorry, I forgot to reindent after import from the pad.
> Samuel Thibault (19/05/2012):
> > - We of course aim at tech preview for wheezy only, not a full
> > release. Our goal is to establish a testi
* Adam D. Barratt (a...@adam-barratt.org.uk) [120519 20:06]:
> On Sat, 2012-05-19 at 17:29 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > - About buildd-dsa, we are fine with a DSA'd buildd, if DSA is happy
> > to maintain it, they will however probably have to learn a few Hurd
> > things? We don't know to wha
Hi,
Very quickly following up on a possible nomenclature issue and a couple
of other things.
On Sat, 2012-05-19 at 17:29 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> - We of course aim at tech preview for wheezy only, not a full
> release. Our goal is to establish a testing distribution for wheezy
> which doe
(Ewww, long lines)
Please keep in mind I'm quite new in the release team, so I'll just
reply on some points that stroke me. I don't speak for the team as
a whole.
Samuel Thibault (19/05/2012):
> - We of course aim at tech preview for wheezy only, not a full
> release. Our goal is to establish a
Hello,
Adam D. Barratt, le Wed 16 May 2012 13:19:46 +0100, a écrit :
> Comments on / additions and corrections to the content of
> http://release.debian.org/wheezy/arch_qualify.html would be appreciated,
> as would any other information you think is relevant to helping us
> determine hurd-i386's s
Hi,
With the sound of the ever approaching freeze ringing loudly in our ears,
we're (somewhat belatedly) looking at finalising the list of release
architectures for the Wheezy release.
Comments on / additions and corrections to the content of
http://release.debian.org/wheezy/arch_qualify.html wou
23 matches
Mail list logo
