Re: Release Plans (1999-05-10)
- To: email@example.com (Joel Klecker)
- Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: Release Plans (1999-05-10)
- From: Richard Braakman <email@example.com>
- Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 13:02:10 +0200 (CEST)
- Message-id: <E10htFi-00026J-00@night>
- In-reply-to: <firstname.lastname@example.org> from Joel Klecker at "May 10, 1999 11:13:51 am"
Joel Klecker wrote:
> At 19:06 +0200 1999-05-10, Richard Braakman wrote:
> > * glibc 2.1 upgrade
> >As far as I know, this project is largely complete. There are one or two
> >bugs left in the backward compatibility code, and there's the question
> >of what to do with /dev/pts.
> No there isn't, /dev/pts is taken care of.
Hmm... then why isn't it used on my system? devpts is mounted, I
have /dev/ptmx, but /dev/pts is empty.
> > * glibc 2.1 source compatibility
> >A larger task is to ensure that all packages still compile on a glibc
> >2.1 development system. The sparc people may have a list of problem
> Most problems in this area have been fixed by the combined effort of
> the sparc, arm, and powerpc porters.
> However, many of the patches are sitting in the BTS and have yet to be applied.
That is what I meant, actually. We should get those patches into the
packages. The issue was delayed during the slink release, I don't think
we can in good conscience delay it again. Debian packages should
compile from source!
> > Potato Architectures:
> >As far as I know it will be the same set as in slink, i.e. i386, m68k,
> >sparc, and alpha. If any other architectures want to make a release
> >they will have to decide soon.
> powerpc wishes to try for potato.
Excellent. Would someone like to be a "sponsor" for that, in the sense
that I described last March?
: * Don't try to keep track of everything. Find a "sponsor" for each
: release goal, who keeps track of progress, makes sure it happens, and
: gives advance warning of any problems. That way the release manager
: only has to stay in touch with the sponsor.