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

Re: Debian installer and CD BoF: my views for jessie

Steven Chamberlain <steven@pyro.eu.org> (2014-08-25):
> On 25/08/14 04:55, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> >  * Architecture support: my own, limited testing made me discover how
> >    badly broken d-i on GNU/kFreeBSD was, and I shared my concerns some
> >    days ago with BSD people and the release team. I haven't seen anyone
> >    commit to fixing d-i there and making sure it's kept in a good shape.
> >    [ To be determined, needs release team input at least. ]
> But I provided patches already for all the important issues you
> mentioned:  #757985, #757987, #757988

Thanks, appreciated.

> and at least replied about the other, to say that it's not a blocker for
> jessie release:  #757986

It was already there in wheezy. Not being able to fix annoying
prompts/red screens on a default installation, over a whole release
cycle, makes me sad.

> In case you still need me to say it explicitly, I am committed to
> testing for and fixing kfreebsd d-i issues between now and release.
> I'll be trying to automate some of this too (initially my own thing,
> hopefully leading to jenkins.d.n integration someday).

Well, yes, that's the kind of thing I'm looking for. We need people
committed to keeping their port alive and useful. Having people upload
some packages and disappear for a while is OK when some others stay and
do the needed work/testing/fixing…

(Unless you tell me otherwise I'll drop the cc in further mails since
you seem to be subscribed to -boot@? Wasn't exactly sure until now.)

> I admit I was not doing full test installs since the d-i alpha (though
> I was doing daily builds of it as part of the kfreebsd 10.1 kernel
> packaging work).  I still thought it was early days to worry about
> d-i, and didn't know the Beta 1 was coming.  I watched Steve's talk
> and I do understand the need for this to happen now.

As I mentioned in another mail, communication for Beta 1 wasn't exactly
perfect, if not entirely missing.

But that doesn't mean that d-i shouldn't work most of the time; or, if
unexpected stuff happens (and that happens regularly!), it should be
detected ASAP, documented, and possibly with plans/ideas to get things
fixed up, if fixes can't be merged right away.

I might be misremembering of course but I think d-i on linux archs has
been working more or less during the whole release cycle. (The parted
transition being an excellent example of the contrary, even if it was
detected straight away, and fixed in a tiny number of days.)


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: