Re: Packages removed from frozen
>>"Marcus" == Marcus Brinkmann <Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de> writes:
Marcus> On Mon, Feb 07, 2000 at 10:20:20PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> gcc would be something that I would be willing to give special
>> dispensation for - espescially since I know it tests itself on
>> passes 2 and 3. Gcc is, therefore, part of the set of packages we
>> call build essentials.
>> However, this is not a dispensation that should be lightly
>> given. Bootstrapping from scratch should be kept to a bare minimum of
>> preinstalled packages -- the build essentials.
Marcus> Sounds easy, but it isn't, unfortunately. There are not only
Marcus> packages that build-depend on themselves (as compilers),
Marcus> there are lots of other packages which can't be bootstrapped
Marcus> within Debian because of longer cycles.
Fairwnough. But you realize that these packages can't be
audited by just looking at teh source code -- trojans may be
propogated unbeknownst to the developers.
I would suggest we document these packages (hence the
requirement for dispensation -- that way we can be sure all these
packages are indeed recoreded).
Marcus> I am all for working out loops and trying to find ways out of them, but
Marcus> getting anal over this is not going to work for the next time.
Depends on what you mean by going anal. I think we should be
very anal about recording every one of these security risks. Any less
would be a disservice to our users.
A sad spectacle. If they be inhabited, what a scope for misery and
folly. If they be not inhabited, what a waste of space. Thomas
Carlyle, looking at the stars
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C