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

Re: Bug#261824: time's up

On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 05:30:55AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> Can the silo I just uploaded go into testing atleast? It does fix some
> bugs. In fact, it may fix some of the rc silo bugs, but I need testing
> with it to make sure (didn't want to claim the bugs were fixed without
> testing by others first).

It fixes the RC build-dependency bug, so it should probably go in; but given
that it's a new upstream version, it should get a fair measure of testing
first -- at least to verify it hasn't caused any major regressions, whether
or not it fixes the outstanding bugs.

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

> On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 02:54:12AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > severity 261824 important
> > severity 267428 important
> > thanks
> > 
> > Time's up, folks; if no fix has been found yet for these bootloader bugs,
> > they'll have to remain hardware-specific errata for sarge.  They will no
> > longer be allowed to block the release, since silo still works on the
> > majority of sparc hardware.
> > 
> > Someone should, however, document these problems for the install manual
> > and/or d-i errata.
> > 
> > If someone can determine one way or another whether the gcc-2.95 rebuild
> > actually fixes the problem on Ultra5 for someone other than Geert, that
> > would help me in deciding whether an NMU is warranted.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: