Re: Updating the release notes
On Sun, Jul 16, 2000 at 06:25:10PM -0700, Miguel Wooding SF Ten.Union wrote:
> The release notes that are at
> http://www.debian.org/releases/frozen/i386/release-notes are still
> version 2.2.15, dated 25 May 2000. Is there a newer version?
Yeah. It's just not published there yet. Will be in a few hours, hopefully.
> There are a couple of items in the release notes that have been discussed
> in this list but have not yet been corrected. (By the way, is there a way
> to submit a bug to the release notes? I didn't see it in the bug tracking
> system.)
Mailing debian-doc list would suffice.
> (1) In upgrading to perl-5.005, any package that has an explicit
> dependency on perl-5.005 (or a dependency on another package depending
> on perl-5.005, like debconf) gets removed if you dist-upgrade
> directly. A work-around is to upgrade perl first, then remove perl,
> then dist-upgrade.
I don't get this. Enabling the APT::Force-LoopBreak option worked fine for
me and others.
> There may be other steps that are recommended before dist-upgrading.
> I don't know whether it made any difference or not, but I started by
> upgrading apt and dpkg.
This is recommended by the Release Notes, too.
> (2) As I understand it, there will be two versions of the cd images,
> one that is allowed to be exported from the US to other countries and
> a second that is not. CD-ROM distributors are encouraged to produce
> the non-exportable versions, not the exportable versions, as the only
> restriction on these is they cannot be produced inside the US and then
> exported. Vendors producing CD-ROM's from outside the US can sell
> them anywhere, and most vendors producing them from inside the US are
> selling them here, not overseas. This seems to me to be an eminently
> reasonable recommendation.
>
> If this understanding is correct, then the discussion in the release
> notes is misleading. It states:
>
> The Official CD-ROM distribution ships as three binary package
> CD-ROMs, containing the "main" and "contrib" sections. If a vendor
> adds "non-US/main" or portions of "non-free" or "non-US/non-free"
> sections to a CD set, there may be four binary CDs.
>
> This should be changed to explain that the recommended official
> version that includes non-US, and that there is also another official
> version that is exportable from the US. Again, as I understand it,
> either of these versions is three CD's. Then it can go on to explain
> why there might be four binary CD's.
Hmm. Someone from debian-cd please confirm?
> Also, is it correct that the official CD includes contrib? I thought
> it only included main.
The ones from slink did...
> (3) There were suggestions in debian-devel that we document the fact
> that a newer version of freeciv and (and perhaps other packages?) is
> in woody. See, for example,
> http://www.debian.org/Lists-Archives/debian-devel-0007/msg00032.html.
> I don't know whether this suggestion was rejected or just forgotten;
> I don't have a strong feeling about it.
Er, isn't it implied that newer versions of software can be found in
the unstable tree?
--
Digital Electronic Being Intended for Assassination and Nullification
Reply to: