Re: shim/shim-signed vs. testing
On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 02:43:42AM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I'm sure this is already on someone's todo list but at least those must
>go away for shim and shim-signed to be testing candidates:
>
> kibi@tokyo:~$ rmadison shim shim-signed -s unstable -a i386 -S
> shim-signed | 1.40+15.7-1 | unstable | i386
> shim-unsigned | 15.7-1 | unstable | i386
>
>(I haven't seen any bug against ftp.debian.org)
Nod, we already know about this. But thanks for checking and reminding
me! :-)
>A cursory look at the tracker pages for both suggests an explicit
>approval is required anyway (to have both updated in lockstep), see
>ivodd's hints file.
ACK.
--
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. steve@einval.com
"I used to be the first kid on the block wanting a cranial implant,
now I want to be the first with a cranial firewall. " -- Charlie Stross
Reply to: