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

Re: Bug#419467: Whoa, upstream wontfix?

(Dropping the bug report)


On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 12:32:23PM -0400, Greg Alexander wrote:
> And re: xfree86...yeah, it sucks, but upgrading X has sucked for every
> Debian release I've ever used.  This is acceptable because X is
> "optional", but libc6 is not.  If you allow the libc6 package to become
> broken in this fashion, this vital functionality of smooth upgrading
> disappears forever, for all users in all instances.

Not all users in all instances, only for those who disregard the release

I agree that the current (as of some days/weeks ago) situation is not
great, the Debian support channel (#debian) has seen quite a few people
who ran dist-upgrade on an unstable system running a 2.4 kernel and got
stuck as libc6 refused to install, but several linux-2.6 support
packages needed to upgrade to a 2.6 kernel were already requiring a
newer glibc, rendering APT broken, so people had to manually install a
2.6 kernel.    

This is somewhat acceptable for unstable, but once glibc-2.5 is supposed
to transition to testing, we should make sure that people can easily
recover, i.e. are able to install a 2.6 kernel via APT frontends.

Of course, a 2.6 kernel is required for lenny and this is
non-negotiable, but the upgrade path could maybe be straighted out,
though I don't know how exactly at this point.

The upgrade from etch->lenny should be safe provided people run/install
a 2.6 kernel while still on etch, I am sure this will be prominently
mentioned in the release announcement/release notes should this still be
an issue by then.



Reply to: