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

Re: Clarification of NMU policy

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

Reply to: