Re: Status report?
At Sat, 27 Aug 2005 16:16:14 -0400,
Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> #317082 is "moreinfo". Has a decision been made on how to fix this?
> If not, frankly it should be downgraded to "important", because it only
> hurts biarch -- meaning it isn't actually a blocker for any single
> subarchitecture -- and that's not nearly as bad as holding up
> every package on every single arch.
In glibc side, I added lib64gcc1 for s390x Depends in 2.3.5-4. So
it's probably OK to split this report for glibc and dpkg. But, the
actual fix for dpkg is under discussion, and I would like to keep
discussing about it.