Re: Libc6 progress: 1997-11-23
Mark Baker wrote:
> I don't think it's sensible for developers to still be running libc5 systems
> at this stage; if the only debian machine they have access to is a
> production system that has to stay on bo, they should ask for an account on
> a libc6 system.
Indeed. Joost Witteveen offers such accounts. (And he told me I could
advertise that on debian-devel :-)
> > Johnie Ingram <johnie@debian.org>:
> > apache-modules-1.1.4
>
> Obsolete
> There aren't many old source format packages left, and we really do want to
> get rid of them all for hamm; it's a slightly more difficult job than just
> doing a lib6 compile, I'd say about an hours work or more, as you have to
> write the rules file more or less from scratch.
It's also quite fun, actually. I think I'll do a few of them when I
have a bit more time; right now all my Debian time goes into
maintaining lists ;-)
By my count there were 25 old source packages left in the main
distribution last week.
> > James LewisMoss <dres@dimensional.com>:
> > xemacs20-20.2-4 (Mixed dependencies)
> > xemacs19-19.16-1 (Mixed dependencies)
>
> Wait until there's a proper libc6 version of libcompface first, rather than
> the semi-working version we've got at the moment.
Hmm. What's wrong with it? My scripts think it's ok, except that the
libc5-compat versions depends on libc6. So it's not in the list.
Who is taking care of libcompface?
> > (orphan):
> > dld-3.2.6 (Old source format)
>
> This is for a.out support---are we going to drop it for hamm? If not, does
> anyone have a suitable system to compile it on? (I think there's a binary
> that needs to be compiled for libc6, but most of it is a library that
> obviously has to be in a.out format)
I don't think we can keep a.out support unless someone who's
interested steps forward and takes care of it. That means taking at
least aout-gcc, aout-binutils, and dld. In effect we've lost a.out
support already since we cannot generate those packages from the
sources in main, so we cannot release them under the social contract.
> > j1-7-7 (Old source format)
>
> The licence looked a bit dubious to me; in any case, the package looks a bit
> of a mess and I'm not sure it's worth the effort to sort it out.
Let's see... there's bug#14175 to ftp.debian.org which says "j1 is not
free". That will have to be resolved first :)
> > Emanuele Pucciarelli <emanuele@debian.org>:
> > postgres95-1.09-1
>
> Replaced by postgresql I think.
That would be "Will be...", then :-)
Postgres seems to be tough to package; I've seen several people try
and give up. Will the latest attempt be ready for hamm?
Richard Braakman
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: