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

Debian Installer Status Update - October 11th 2007

Hash: SHA1

= New stuff =

 * win32-loader has been added to daily CD images and is now used for
   autorun too;
 * multipath-udeb and libaio1-udeb have been introduced but are being
   excluded from CD builds since they're not being used yet;
 * dhcp-client-udeb has been excluded from CD images since
   dhcp3-client-udeb migration is over;
 * weekly CD/DVD builds have been enabled again (using sid d-i, by
 * netinst images were huge due to debian-cd including dependencies of
   excluded packages (#410418).
 * cdebconf has received a lot of code refactoring, plugin system had
   deeply changes and gtk frontend has been rewritten.
 * cdebconf-entropy has been updated to use the new plugin system;
 * mklibs has fixed our building errors due a lack of symbols;

= Resolved breakage in daily builds =

 * newt had issues with time changing (#436497) but a workaround is
   implemented in clock-setup when updating time during installation
 * g{++,cc}-multilib priority is now lower than standard (#424924).
= General issues =

 * Chinese (and Japanese/Korean) texts issue in slang2 (#425835) is
   still there;
 * klibc doesn't build on sparc (#440721)

= Kernel status =

 * All architectures has moved to 2.6.22 except m68k;
 * linux-modules-di-m68k-2.6 isn't uploaded due the lack of loop-aes
   and squashfs since linux-headers lack modules.lds files (#402061).

= Blockers for final release =

 * Regressions in cleaning old LVM partitions (#425829);
 * sparc kernel seems to produces unkillable processes (#433187).
 * linux-libc-dev has type declaration conflict (#434040, #435700)
   ('''ignored for beta1 since a workaround is used''')
 * m68k has floppy flavours disabled due a full-disk. ('''ignored
   since m68k isn't a release-set arch''')

- --

on behalf of Debian Installer Release Team
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8+ <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>


Reply to: