[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#699109: marked as done (unblock (pre-approval): initramfs-tools-tcos/0.89.91)

Your message dated Thu, 11 Apr 2013 21:53:53 +0100
with message-id <20130411205353.GT11842@ernie.home.powdarrmonkey.net>
and subject line Re: Bug#699109: unblock (pre-approval): initramfs-tools-tcos/0.89.91
has caused the Debian Bug report #699109,
regarding unblock (pre-approval): initramfs-tools-tcos/0.89.91
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
699109: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=699109
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
X-Debbugs-CC: mariodebian@gmail.com

Hi,

Could Release Team please say if the changes proposed in #694870 to
fix an RC bug are OK to go?


Cheers.
-- 
Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo <manuel.montezelo@gmail.com>

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 10:50:02PM +0100, Mario Izquierdo wrote:
> El mié, 20-03-2013 a las 00:00 +0000, Jonathan Wiltshire escribió:
> > user release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
> > usertag 699109 + wheezy-will-remove
> > usertag 694870 + wheezy-will-remove
> > thanks
> > 
> > On Fri, Mar 01, 2013 at 02:14:58PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 09:22:35 +0000, Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo wrote:
> > > 
> > > > 2013/1/27 Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>:
> > > > > On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 17:42:48 +0000, Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Could Release Team please say if the changes proposed in #694870 to
> > > > >> fix an RC bug are OK to go?
> > > > >>
> > > > > Please include an actual diff in this bug instead of a pointer to
> > > > > $somewhere_else.
> > > > 
> > > > Attached.
> > > > 
> > > > According to the discussion in that bug report, the patch does need to
> > > > be so big to fix three separate issues, and without the fixes it seems
> > > > that the software will not be functional.
> > > > 
> > > I'm not overly happy with this patch.  The multiarch "fixes" just
> > > hardcode two paths in an arch:all package with no apparent x86
> > > dependency.  And the /etc/console-setup stuff looks like it'd break if
> > > two files match the glob.  I'm more tempted by a removal at this point
> > > to be honest.
> > 
> > Is there any progress on this? With a low popcon, maintainer seemingly
> > unresponsive, RC buggy and never in a stable release, please note that
> > removal will happen in a few days if this can't be resolved a better way.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> 
> Thanks for CC me in this last email, I don't know any of this bug
> comments.
> 
> 
> I attach a new patch with a better multiarch and console-setup hacks
> 
> 
> If you still want to remove from wheezy, not agree but ok for me, Ubuntu
> have TCOS since 12.04 and I would be very disappointed that Debian not.

I'm sorry it couldn't be resolved better, but with no prospect of this
being sponsored it's just too late to be getting this kind of diff into
Wheezy. I've scheduled removals of tcos, tcosmonitor and tcosconfig.

-- 
Jonathan Wiltshire                                      jmw@debian.org
Debian Developer                         http://people.debian.org/~jmw

4096R: 0xD3524C51 / 0A55 B7C5 1223 3942 86EC  74C3 5394 479D D352 4C51

<directhex> i have six years of solaris sysadmin experience, from
            8->10. i am well qualified to say it is made from bonghits
			layered on top of bonghits

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


--- End Message ---
Reply to: