[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Release-critical Bugreport for April 28, 2000

On Mon, May 01, 2000 at 11:10:22AM +0200, Christian Kurz wrote:

> > I am aware of that, sure. The problem is that somebody said on -devel, 
> > that there are differences between libreadline version 2 and 4 that 
> Who said that and what are exactly the differences? 

I don't remember who said it and I don't know the exact differences. It 
does not really matter though. 

> > can't be dealt with by recompiling. So every time we just recompile 
> > a package against libreadline4 we risk breaking that package. 
> So why did we then move libreadline4 to section base for potato and
> libreadlineg2 to oldlibs? How many package may be broken in the archive
> because of this? Where do you risk breacking that package if you
> recompiled it and test it?

Okay - but who will test it? I don't use it and I have no idea how testing 
would be done.

> > And this is not the right time for such experiments...
> So we should still stick with libraries from the section oldlibs? When
> is the right time for experiments? 

The right time for such experiments is when you upload to unstable. Not 



Torsten Landschoff           Bluehorn@IRC               <torsten@debian.org>
           Debian Developer and Quality Assurance Committee Member

Reply to: