Re: armel boxes for Debian
On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 07:44:30PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> > We could just declare arm a second-class architecture for security updates,
> > i.e. DSAs being released once all archs are available except arm and arm
> > updates being released once available. For small to medium packages most
> > updates would still be released in sync, since we're not available to
> > release updates 24/7.
> Yeah, that's what I was suggesting.
> > But we should stop withholding security updates because we wait on slow
> > archs. Debian was the first to fix the vmsplice root exploit. If we
> > had released all archs in sync we would have left most of our users
> > unprotected for two more days.
> And that advisory was initially only released for alpha, i386, amd64, ia64,
> and s390 -- so it wasn't only arm being too slow in that case. Perhaps
> arm delayed the follow-up advisory though?
In this case I released builds as soon as I saw them come available,
but waited until they were all released before sending an update to
sparc took longer than arm to send a build log, which is abnormal in
my experience. I actually ended up releasing a manual build under the
assumption the sparc buildd was having problems.