Re: Can we upload binaries using libc6 to hamm yet?
On Apr 24, Mark Shuttleworth wrote
> The biggest mistake Debian could make would be to try and be all things to
> all people. The decision has been taken that hamm will be libc6 based,
> and all effort should be focused on making that happen. Rather than try
> and support both libc5 and libc6, the energies of so many developers
> would best be spent on the update.
> Here's a proposal:
> 1. Some developers volunteer to build bo-fixes as they're required.
> They keep their development systems on stable. Typically these would
> be relatively new recruits such as myself, on a pool basis, who
> are just going to build packages from source that the maintainer has
> provided a source fix to. So bo-fixes is handled by them.
> 2. Developers who are going to provide packages for hamm take the
> plunge and move to libc6 as soon as it is available after bo goes
> gold. If a security bug is found in their bo package they supply
> a source fix to one of the volunteers above.
> If many packages are simply a recompile away, these can also be done by
> volunteers. I'd say that packages should not be allowed into hamm if they
> depend on libc5, so there will be a need for a rash of rebuilds from bo
> to hamm.
This all sounds reasonable to me.
> This sort of switch is never easy, and it could easily happen every two
> years. To try and support multiple build environments will just make the
> painful period more painful and longer.
David Engel ODS Networks
email@example.com 1001 E. Arapaho Road
(972) 234-6400 Richardson, TX 75081
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org .