Re: Debian Specialities (fwd)
Hi,
It all boils down to customer support, in this case. The
debian project supplies known good kernels, and other software, to
our ``customers'', dosemu being one of them. Usually, we supply a
stable kernel, and with it should come a dosemu that is in synch with
it.
As time goes on, more and more of the customers g over to
custom built kernels, which may or may not work with the older
dosemu. (well, unstable means just that, right?). Being nice people,
we periodically supply newer kernel images in unstable, and maybe
upgrade dosemu to work with these as well. *But*, this is not a
situation we are committed to support (we did say unstable, after
all). We should in no case let down the people using the stable
versions of debian, and our current /usr/include policy helps build a
stabler system (since the libc developer has been fairly conservative
in the past, thank goodness), since most developers compile against a
relatively stable include tree, without stifling their desire to keep
to the bleeding edge or retain an ancient kernel tree.
As long as we have ``periodic'' releases of libc and packages
like dosemu to somewhat cater to the bleeding edge people, we should
be doing ok (this could doubtless be stated better in terms of risk
management and keeping up to date).
After all this rambling, I again say that our current header
policy, IMHO, is just fine.
manoj
--
"There was nothing I hated more than to see a filthy old drunkie, a
howling away at the sons of his father and going blurp blurp in
between as if it were a filthy old orchestra in his stinking rotten
guts. I could never stand to see anyone like that, especially when
they were old like this one was." Alex in "Clockwork Orange"
Manoj Srivastava <url:mailto:srivasta@datasync.com>
Mobile, Alabama USA <url:http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com
Reply to: