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

Re: GDM 2.4 in sid

Ryan Murray <rmurray@debian.org> writes:

> None of which are RC.  None of which give you a reason to hijack the
> package.

As I understand, nobody has expressed an intention to hijack your
gdm package. Rather, alternatives have been discussed.


Earlier, you explained IIRC that you did not upgrade gdm as it fails
to build on all arches. Right?

If this is the case, and if you don't have time to further investigate
this matter, wouldn't it be the best strategy to find someone with
plenty of time and energy who is willing to fix 2.4?



~/.signature under construction

Reply to: