Re: No y2k safe stable ---> Debian will suffer...

[Onno <ebbin200@tech.nhl.nl>]

When I take a look at the reactions I can't help
to think there is a need for 2.1r4 that addresses
the y2k problems (and the standard stuff for such an
update) to make slink rock stable even in the next
millennium...

Regards,

Onno


At 03:11 PM 11/8/99 -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
> Michael Stone wrote:
> > > Because htdig, util-linux, dgs, gs, gnats, nethack, and probably other
> > > packages in stable have y2k bugs.
> >
> > Why isn't that on w.d.o/y2k/?
>
> It is.
>
> util-linux 2.7.1-3 BAD?
> gnats 3.2 BAD http://www.gnu.org/software/year2000-list.html
> nethack 3.2.2 BAD http://www.gnu.org/software/year2000-list.html
> gs 4.03 BAD http://www.gnu.org/software/year2000-list.html
> g77 0.5.33 BAD http://www.gnu.org/software/year2000-list.html
> enscript 1.4.0,1.5.0 BAD http://www.gnu.org/software/year2000-list.html
> dgs 0.5.0 BAD http://www.gnu.org/software/year2000-list.html
> dgs-dev 0.5.0 BAD http://www.gnu.org/software/year2000-list.html
> cvs 1.8,1.9 BAD http://www.cyclic.com/cvs/info-y2k.html
>
> etc, etc.
>
> --
> see shy jo
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org