On Sat, Apr 23, 2005 at 07:55:52AM +0200, Andreas Jochens wrote: > Steve Langasek wrote: > > Andreas Jochens wrote: > >> It will only be necessary to describe the current situation > >> in the official release documents and include pointers > >> to the separate amd64 archive, which will be provided > >> by the amd64 porting team anyway. > > Have you discussed this with the security team, and have they agreed to > > provide stable security support for amd64 in sync with the other > > architectures? Or have they agreed to coordinate with someone on the amd64 > > team for security support? I don't think we can consider it an official > > stable port without this key feature. > This is still an open issue, yes. > Security support for amd64 sarge will be one of the main topics for the > amd64 porters irc meeting today. An autobuilder has been prepared > which will build amd64 security updates for sarge as soon as the sources > become available. However, as far as I know, this has not yet been > officially coordinated with the security team and I do not know the > position of the security team on this. But I am confident that a > solution can be found for this issue. The amd64 is certainly willing > to do the necessary work. > Besides security support, do you have any other concerns which should > be addressed to make a sarge release for the amd64 architecture > possible? Well, the other big ones would be the installer, being synced up on sources, and the ability to do point releases. It seems the first two are addressed, and the third seems to be more or less the same question as that of security support -- whether the people involved are willing to coordinate with an externally-hosted repo when doing updates. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature