Re: A Round of Removals
severity 148823 serious
thanks
On Sun, Oct 27, 2002 at 09:38:56AM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> severity 148823 important
> thank
> Grr. I wonder how a package with an upload two weeks ago meets the
> criterium "effectively unmaintained packages". Could somebody please
> elaborate? (This is no case of "a package has security bugs
> that've been outstanding for four and half months").
It's a case of "a package with release critical bugs, that have been
outstanding for ridiculously long amounts of time". Don't waste your time
arguing about these things, *fix* them instead.
> I'll downgrade the bug to important [...] instead of grave [...]
> It is no security bug and people on platforms without signed char can
> perfectly use the package ("without rendering it completely unusable
> to everyone").
Just fix the bug. The usual ways of doing so for bugs like this is to
make use of gcc's -fsigned-char option, or changing your Architecture:
line to indicate it only works on whichever architectures it works on.
If you can't work out how to fix bugs like these, ask for help on -qa
or -devel or IRC, don't make up excuses to put off fixing it even longer.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``If you don't do it now, you'll be one year older when you do.''
Reply to: