Re: [Jackit-devel] Re: Re: little NPTL SCHED_FIFO test program
- To: Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>
- Cc: Robert Jordens <robertjo@phys.ethz.ch>, Paul Davis <paul@linuxaudiosystems.com>, Fons Adriaensen <fons.adriaensen@skynet.be>, jackit-devel <jackit-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>, Florian Schmidt <mista.tapas@gmx.net>, debian-glibc@lists.debian.org, Martijn Sipkema <msipkema@sipkema-digital.com>
- Subject: Re: [Jackit-devel] Re: Re: little NPTL SCHED_FIFO test program
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <dan@debian.org>
- Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 10:36:18 -0400
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20040821143618.GA13869@nevyn.them.org>
- Mail-followup-to: Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>, Robert Jordens <robertjo@phys.ethz.ch>, Paul Davis <paul@linuxaudiosystems.com>, Fons Adriaensen <fons.adriaensen@skynet.be>, jackit-devel <jackit-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>, Florian Schmidt <mista.tapas@gmx.net>, debian-glibc@lists.debian.org, Martijn Sipkema <msipkema@sipkema-digital.com>
- In-reply-to: <[🔎] 1093054657.838.14.camel@krustophenia.net>
- References: <pan.2004.08.19.23.33.47.308243@gmx.de> <1092986849.10063.57.camel@krustophenia.net> <20040820092632.GA6521@rjo.dnsalias.org> <1092994456.10063.72.camel@krustophenia.net> <20040820103521.GC6521@rjo.dnsalias.org> <1092998485.10063.108.camel@krustophenia.net> <pan.2004.08.20.14.03.31.68398@gmx.de> <[🔎] 1093033704.10063.155.camel@krustophenia.net> <[🔎] 20040821011103.GK6521@rjo.dnsalias.org> <[🔎] 1093054657.838.14.camel@krustophenia.net>
On Fri, Aug 20, 2004 at 10:17:37PM -0400, Lee Revell wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-08-20 at 21:11, Robert Jordens wrote:
> > [witten after a few beers and a birthday party at 3 am, so please excuse
> > misleading wording]
> >
> > Hello!
> >
> > [Fri, 20 Aug 2004] Lee Revell wrote:
> > > Argh, they will not even fix it in unstable? What is the point of
> > > having an unstable distribution?!?. Can we at least add the fix to
> > > experimental?
> >
> > It's always an additional commitment and more work to maintain another
> > branch. Since the NPTL bug is not considered important enough there is
> > no need to dedicate a branch to it. This is just coherent.
> >
> > > If not now, then when do you expect this to be in unstable?
> >
> > Personal judgement: With about 90% probability after the first release of
> > sarge.
> >
>
> I was looking for a timeframe. Weeks, months, years? The debian
> release cycle is notoriously slow.
You could exert a little effort to find out before insulting the
maintainers. The release is optimistically scheduled for the middle of
September.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
Reply to: