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

it is almost mini-freeze time ...



Hello everyone, ...

glibc 2.3.1-12 is almost ready, and should fix all RC bugs (except the
licence issue, but which will not stop glibc to enter testing, after all
the licence problems has been in glibc for years, so it would not make
the new version less buggy than the one actually in testing). The
message about it can be seen here :

http://lists.debian.org/debian-glibc/2003/debian-glibc-200302/msg00191.html

Anyway, as discussed previously, this marks the begining of our ocaml
mini-freeze, so that we are ready to enter testing together with the new
glibc.

BTW, the testing version of ocaml will break as soon as the new glibc
will enter testing, the proper solution would be to add a Conflicts:
ocaml (<<3.06-7) to libc6, but this means that libc6 will have to wait
for ocaml to be ready, which i feel is not nice, so i think we should go
with this temporary brokeness, if you all agree. After all, people using
testing should upgrade to the unstable version, and all would be fine.

That said, there is a problem with people from testing using the woody
backport from Stefano, which i believe uses the same version numbers as
the unstable version, but is built with the older glibc, and thus will
not be catched by the above conflict.

Maybe i should upload a 3.06-16 or 17 version or such, and ask the glibc
maintainers to add the conflict to it, and Stefano don't backports it.
Or maybe, Stefano, you should renumber the ocaml backport package to
something like : ocaml 3.06-0.16 or something such in the future ?

Or maybe we should publisize this fact or something such (with a mail
on the caml-list maybe).

Anyway, please everyone check your packages and your packages
dependencies, and try to follow up with problems that may come up.

All my packages are built on all arches, except advi which is missing on
ia64 and mips, and also camlimages for which i did an NMU. Need to check
the dependencies of those yet though.

Friendly,

Sven Luther



Reply to: