Re: Bug#15859: libc6 in stable is horribly broken
On Sat, Dec 13, 1997 at 01:44:51PM +1100, Martin Mitchell wrote:
>
> If they want to remain with a libc5 development environment, they have two
> choices, stay with bo, or use altdev from hamm. You regard utmp corruption
> as a minor issue, I would not, especially if I expected that staying with
> mainly bo would give me a stable system. No one is forcing them to do
> anything, however it is not unreasonable to expect them to upgrade some
> packages, including replacing -dev with -altdev, if they want to have the
> benefits of some newer packages.
Isn't this the whole point of compiling hamm packages for bo? Ie, the
bo-updates, bo-current or whatever directory that we have been
discussing for some time?
Ciao,
--
David Welton http://www.efn.org/~davidw
Debian GNU/Linux - www.debian.org
--
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: