[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

dropping tc1

It looks like we have to throw out tc1 as not good enough for release.
The release critical problems include:

 - some broken m68k images (unknown mke2fs fix needed)
 - broken sparc64 module loading (fix: busybox-cvs 20040415-3)
 - messed up line drawing characters in base-config (fix: base-config 2.29)
 - broken support for 100 gb partitions on i386 (fix: base-installer 0.083)
 - the above problem seems to affect nearly any size partitions on alpha
   and probably other 64 bit systems (workaround: base-installer 0.083;
   also needs *-installer fixes)

Some items that I do not consider release critical, but are still pretty
bad and potentially worth fixing:

 - 2.6 lvm and raid segfaults and hangs (fix: lvm2 2.00.16-2)
 - airport module not available post-reboot on powerpc (fix: ddetect 0.101)
 - firewire cd support (fix: ddetect 0.101)
 - mips Installs on r4k-ip22 needs 36 mb ram (fix: unknown -- new glibc?)
 - broken ataraid and ida support (fix: libdebian-installer 0.26.really.0.22)

The fact that we still lack a fix for the m68k images problem, and that,
2 weeks after tc1 was released, we still lack any test reports for
sparc64, ia64, or hppa, makes me question whether we can expect to
release at all in the immediate future. I'm not going to bother with a
tc2 until the m68k problem has a solution, and until we know whether tc1
or current sarge_d-i works or fails on sparc64, ia64, and hppa; more
than likely one of the three has some problem that would require more
changes, and I want to know about it in time for tc2.

I'll be away for a week after Tuesday. I hope some of these issues are
resolved when I get back so that we can begin getting a tc2 ready. In
the meantime, tbm and kamion have the ability to get fixed udebs into
testing. Since tc1 is a lost cause, there's no reason not to start with
getting some of the abovementioned udebs, if the other changes in them
are small enough (if not, consider an upload to t-p-u with only the
required fixes) and if they've been well enough tested in unstable to be
known safe.

see shy jo

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: