On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 02:40:07PM +0100, Loïc Minier wrote: > On Wed, Nov 02, 2005, Steve Langasek wrote: > > For the record: there currently is not a 0-day NMU policy in effect. There > > was a 0-day NMU policy through the sarge release, and there are 0-day NMU > > policies during BSPs, but the default NMU policy has reverted to that in the > > developer's reference for now, in the absence of any other poilcy. > I think you skip the NMU policy for the C++ transition, for which I > think the first announcement was here: > <http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2005/07/msg00001.html> Ah, yes; I meant there was no 0-day policy in effect for packages at large. :) > The C++ transition had no clear end, and AIUI is still ongoing. I > think it's a bit fuzzy to track how far we are, what remains to be > done, and how long it's going to take, but I don't have any solution to > that. http://people.debian.org/~mfurr/gxx/rebuild.html is still probably the best summary of the status, although at this point most of the packages there are not even NMU candidates since they only depend on libstdc++5 on one or two architectures due to arch-specific problems. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature