Petter Reinholdtsen <pere@hungry.com> (2014-09-11): > [Cyril Brulebois] > > I'm not sure why you thought it would be a good idea to mix > > renaming and reusing udeb/deb package name, but one thing is > > pretty clear: you never tested a d-i build using those udebs. You > > would have otherwise noticed the mess you created. > > I assume you mean the image build when you say d-i build? Of course a failing d-i build means src:debian-installer FTBFS. What else would that be? > > I'm not even going to ask about runtime tests… > > The installation work fine, both from ISO and via PXE, thanks for > not asking. :) I'm not amused. Please explain how you managed to build installation images with a failing d-i build. > > Please unbreak! > > Will do. Thanks for the heads up. :) I'm not sure why you're insisting on the renaming. Please explain why you did that (see my first follow-up). Also. No, IRC isn't the place to ask fly-by “I'll upload debian-installer?” like questions. No, it makes NO SENSE WHATSOEVER to upload debian-installer right now anyway since the linux kernel is not ready. It's not even built everywhere! Please see my mail about avoiding disruptive changes. This kind of changes should have been done at the beginning of the release cycle. We're way past the time it's OK to merge such disruptive changes with absolutely no coordination, and no test. Since you failed to give a reason to keep this change, I think a revert is the best way. KiBi.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature