Re: libc6_2.0.7 release notes...
Dale Scheetz <dwarf@polaris.net> writes:
> On 22 Jun 1998, Rob Browning wrote:
> > Good luck. It would be great if you come up with one, but I fear it's
> > going to be a lot of work for essentially a *really* minor aesthetic
> > gain.
> >
> > One way this could almost be handled is with and additional control
> > file where you could list sort exceptions. Something like this:
> >
> > 2.0.7pre1 < 2.0.7
> > 2.0.8pre7 < 2.0.8
> >
>
> I like Santiago's suggestion better:
>
> 2.0.8pre1 => 2.0.7.99.1
> 2.0.8pre2 => 2.0.7.99.2
> :
> 2.0.8 => 2.0.8
>
> Which scales properly and solves the problem.
No, it doesn't solve our *immediate* problem (unless I don't
understand you).
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE! Do not cause hell on Debian by asking people to
upgrade libc by hand if they're already running hamm. A good
percentage of Debian users (not just developers) are already running
hamm. Why should we have this academic discussion. Just use epochs,
use 2.0.7r, use *something*.
Again, I really think asking people to upgrade libc by hand in case
they're already using 2.0.7 is unacceptable.
* It's going to make Debian look bad (i.e., what kinda crappy
pacakging system is that, grumble grumble).
* I don't care how heavily you advertise, people won't read it and
won't do it and pacakge maintainers are going to have to deal with
people sticking on the old libc6 2.0.7 pre.
* Installation instructions are going to break, i.e., you can't keep
your machine up-to-date just using apt
* versioned depends are going to break (if any exist)
Geeze! You want to have all this pain and suffering just because you
think epoch's or 2.0.7r is "clutter"?? What clutter? It's just a
number in a changelog; users don't even see it!
BTW, Dale, thanks for the great work getting this out.
--
.....A. P. Harris...apharris@onShore.com...<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: