Re: 178 days and counting
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Friday 27 September 2002 7:01 pm, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
> Am Freitag, 27. September 2002 19:36 schrieb
>
> Derrell.Lipman@UnwiredUniverse.com:
> > woody/unstable (libc3.x maybe? I don't remember.) that were
> > dependencies.
>
> Because you wrote that often enought now:
> "woody" is not "unstable" or "testing" but the current "stable", maybe you
> should take a look at http://www.debian.org to get this right:
> "woody" == current "stable"
> "sarge" == current "testing"
> "sid" == always "unstable"
> It is annoying and hard to track what you mean when you mix this up
> completely.
>
> BTW: I don't understand why most unstable packages are not in unstable
> anymore. KDE3.x ist left out because of gcc3.2, although it does not make
> much sense: if it breaks on transistion to gcc3.2- well, it's unstable.
> Same with XFree4.2. What's the difference to make the gcc change with or
> without KDE3 in unstable? It compiles with gcc2.95 and troubles with gcc3.2
> are expected anyway.
> Sorry, but it does not make much sense to me at all. This is no matter to
> me though because I track testing and not unstable. But current behaviour
> makes unstable rather pointless.
>
The current plan intents to append a c to the package name for 3.2 compiled
packages. This can then go when the soname is upped. So if we put KDE in now,
we are stuck with kdelibs4c until kde4 is released.
Plus it means that we can compile KDE3 outside of the transition so we reduce
the workload on the other Debian Developers
- --
David Pashley
david@davidpashley.com
Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.0 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE9ls8aYsCKa6wDNXYRAt+VAJ9blzY6DQkn2G7BAvcCnDONS7S3QQCgoh99
qB1740oMIMKtbMXMYEK2U0w=
=qhgv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: