Bug#205691: HPPA: dependencies broken BOTH in testing and unstable
On Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 11:42:45AM +0300, Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Sep 2003, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 03:06:24AM +0300, Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
> > > I still think that skiping a supported architecture, as well as
> > > the ground rule about syncing everything before allowing a package
> > > to slide down to testing, is a REALLY bad idea, especialy for
> > > something so fundamental as glibc.
> >
> > It's impractical to allow one architecture to hold testing hostage
> > for this long;
>
> It was practical to hold Gnome2 for almost 1 year, though. How odd. :)
GNOME 2 was far more broken than glibc for that period, far less
critical, had far fewer things waiting for it, and had far more of its
own dependencies which were getting in the way. Also we weren't really
actively trying to get a release out then.
> Besides, while 2.3.1 has been a long bottleneck thta prevented
> practically all of unstable to slide into testing for about 6 months
> (IIRC), 2.3.2 has been there for less than 1 month IIRC, so I really
> don't see the problem with waiting for hppa to catch up.
You may not, but we do, particularly with a release currently scheduled
for December. There are many things that need to be fixed in testing
before then, and having to wait for glibc has already made them a
substantial amount more difficult. More waiting was intolerable.
Cheers,
--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@flatline.org.uk]
Reply to: