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

Re: amd64 and sarge


Andreas Barth wrote:
> What may be possible in my opinion is to add amd64 as a "maybe
> broken"-architecture even to sarge (means: bugs only for that arch are
> non-RC per definition, and this arch doesn't count for package
> transits to sarge); on the other hand, porters uploads of amd64-binary
> packages even to t-p-u are relaxed till sarge r1 (or so). Via this
> way, amd64 packages are in the archive, even in the dist called sarge.
I'm not quite sure I understand what this proposal means for the release

How does fit with having one version of every given source package in a
i.e. foo 4.3.2-1 in stable Sarge r0 has an amd64 bug which requires an
invasive fix.
Which will be the version for Sarge r1 on architectures besides amd64?
Which will be the version of the foo source package in Sarge r1?

Kind regards


Thomas Viehmann, <http://thomas.viehmann.net/>

Attachment: pgpbdmvieoOdZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: