Bug#587886: future of maintaining of the bootloader LILO
Hi,
----- "Ian Jackson" <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> Joachim Wiedorn writes ("Bug#587886: future of maintaining of the
> bootloader LILO"):
> > because of the discussions of the last weeks mostly on debian-devel
> I
> > have sent this bug report:
> > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=587886
> > to the Technical Committee of Debian to find a solution.
>
> I've caught up on all of this now. I'm not sure I quite understand
> the position of the current lilo maintainers. In
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2010/05/msg00769.html
> William writes:
>
> it has pretty much been determined that kernel sizes have crossed
> the
> line past where lilo can reliably determine the payload size.
>
> William, to what are you referring ? Can you provide a bug number ?
Please read all of the bug reports on lilo. At least half of them are related
to this issue. Fortunately, payload sizes have dropped below the watermark.
> William and Matt: Can you confirm that you still intend to remove
> lilo
> from squeeze ?
Matt really is not part of this decision-making process at this time, as he
has never provided any insight into any critical decisions with this package.
Simply put: he is not qualified to maintain lilo and adding him to Uploaders
was a terrible mistake. His motivation for maintaining lilo is that it's a
'high-calibur' package. I regret that mistake.
>
> Do we have another person who wants to maintain lilo in Debian ?
It should not be maintained by someone who simply blindly applies patches
to the 22.8 source. I believe that giving Joachim maintainership of lilo
is actively harmful to the QA process of Debian, and will continue to believe
so until his work on lilo actually has merit. If I believed otherwise, then
lilo 23.0 would be uploaded right now obviously.
On a side note: the bug reporter needs to find something better to do with
their time. lilo has no future. Making a 23.0 release with nothing other
than *broken* patches does not give it one.
Let the damned thing die already.
William
Reply to: