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

Re: to reiterate, why are there no security updates on the front page? (Or, 17 security holes the security team hasn't told you about)

On Mon, May 29, 2000 at 04:39:20AM -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
> Problem yes, removed no.  That's rather draconian.

why?  all archetectures are in this together no?  if some package is
broken on sparc thus having the last RC bug. but the every other arch
and package is fine do we release potato without sparc?

i realize its not an exact comparison given that netscape is one big
RC bug in and of itself but debian does not want to remove it given
that it would make us a laughing stock, but still 4.7 is an improvment
and the powerpc users are PISSED that debian refuses to package it. 

> We are not other distributions.  And why is having a version on powerpc that
> is older than i386 a rc bug?

because 4.6 is all but unusable it should be removed for that reason,
but AFAIK packages cannot be removed from one archecture but not the
others.  (dark refused to do this after a request from a maintainer
iirc)  the RC bug is that netscape is mostly worthless as is, not that
its outdated per se.

> FYI, I saw yet another bug, similiar to the one in 4.72 and earlier, that ALSO
> affects 4.73.  All I do is shrug.  There's not much more one can do.

yes i saw that as well, i agree netscape is mostly a lost cause but it
would help if we would do the best we can, given there ARE binaries
for at least 4.7 (which would buy better stability) why are they not
packaged?  (from what you said in the last message it seems that
question is directed at dark) 

BTW: a simple `netscape has not released 4.73 binaries and has
{ignored,refused} all requests to do so' would have been a sufficient
answer, you did not have to flame me over it.  i probably should have
put an `[if available]' but i didn't think of it.  

Ethan Benson

Attachment: pgpyyHUNzhzKe.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: