Re: libc6 too unstable ?
I should take this time to put in a concern of mine.
My machine that I do development on is largely running stable. As I
use it for other things besides Debian and have a limited amount of
time, I cannot afford to run unstable on it, especially with such
drastic changes. The good news is: none of my packages are libraries
or something of the sort.
Does this mean that I need to find another machine to use for a
development machine for Debian? Or is it OK to release libc5 packages
into unstable until unstable becomes stable enough to be usable?
(Ick, what an ugly sentence.. <g>)
Ian Jackson <email@example.com> writes:
> I note from the `Upcoming Debian Releases' posting:
> August 31, 1997 All uploaded packages must depend on libc6.
> However, my experience with attempting to install even libc6 runtime
> functionality on a libc5-based system was that everything broke
> horribly due to incompatible libc versions ending up dynamically
> linked into the same binary. I was going to say see my bug report
> number XYZ, but it seems to have gotten lost ! Unfortunately I
> submitted it too long ago for my mail logs so I can't track it. I'll
> resubmit it, under the title `libc6 transition and Perl breakage'.
> Has this issue been fixed yet ? I think it is unreasonable to expect
> all maintainers to upload libc6 packages when the libc6 environment is
> too unstable to use.
> Furthermore, I trust that a libc5 upload into unstable, replacing an
> older or more buggy libc5 package, will not be rejected merely because
> of its libc5-ness ?
> PS: I presume you mean `must not depend on libc5' rather than `must
> depend on libc6'.
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
> firstname.lastname@example.org .
> Trouble? e-mail to email@example.com .
John Goerzen | Running Debian GNU/Linux (www.debian.org)
Custom Programming | Debian GNU/Linux is a free replacement for
firstname.lastname@example.org | DOS/Windows -- check it out at www.debian.org.
Notice: You may purchase the right to send me unsolicited commercial e-mail
("spam") for the fee of $500 (USD) per message. Billing can be either
pre-arranged or can occur automatically after the reception of a spam.
Failure to pay will be treated in accordance to US Code, title 47, sec. 227,
which allows unsolicited e-mail to be punishable by action to recover actual
monetary loss or $500, whichever is greater, per violation. Sending spam
to me without payment constitutes unauthorized access to my mail daemon,
which is in violation of federal law.
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to email@example.com .