Re: Two proposals for a better Lenny (testing related).
Qui, 2007-06-14 às 14:40 -0700, Steve Langasek escreveu:
> It's an example that does not support your thesis. I have explained
> to you
> that packages are *not* propagated automatically to testing when they
> break
> the installability of other packages present in testing; that the
> nvidia
> modules packages include metapackages designed to keep the modules in
> sync
> with the kernel; and that the nvidia modules were specifically broken
> *by
> the release team* during the etch release because this was the lesser
> evil.
> You insist that there need to be more automatic checks for testing,
> but you
> haven't identified any checks that aren't already in place.
yes, i failed to show an existing situation ... i no longer use testing.
I know how the passage is done. dependencies are checked.
But, i had issues in the past (etch testing cycle). Since Gustvo raised
the testing problems, i thought i should gave my word has *testing*
user.
You grabbed the nvidia problem ... that was just one. Other was with
xorg and xbase-clients (a newer version of xbase-clients[0] was needed),
when the xorg 7.0 x11-common package entered testing. xorg 7.0 (or
6.9 ... i don't remember) dropped the use of the symlink to /usr/X11/bin
(or other place, i can't remember) ... i even opened a bug [1] (which i
closed a few weeks ago - this was the 6.x to 6.9 transition).
i just want to say that things like these can't happen ... (in this
case, reverse dependencies where ok ... by the way).
[0] http://packages.debian.org/unstable/x11/xbase-clients
[1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=370370
Reply to: