On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 03:52:42PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote: > On Wed, 20 Aug 2003, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 19, 2003 at 04:49:25PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > > > Also make sure to include some leg room if you depend on packages that > > > have a tendency to be buggy (glibc, for example). > > The new glibc has already stalled the progress into testing of a large > > number of packages, and the number of RC bugs still seems to be going up. > > How are we going to manage to produce a release in 6 months the face of this > > obstacle? The last time there was this sort of breakage, it took many > > months just to get glibc itself it sorted out. > Will we some day consider seriously the idea of autobuilders compiling > against testing those packages which do not need libraries from > unstable to be built? Do you foresee any reasons why using experimental for new library uploads wouldn't serve the same purpose? -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
pgpcLVhL7kbRK.pgp
Description: PGP signature