Re: Xfree 3.3.3.1
On Thu, Jan 28, 1999 at 02:32:04PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 28, 1999 at 06:54:31PM +0100, Sven LUTHER wrote:
> > huh ??? as long as nobody compiles them on i386, there should be no
> > problem ... and anyway, the packages in potato should be the same as
> > the ones in slink, since they come from the same source, well i guess
> > the difference is in the environment used for building this stuff ...
>
> X 3.3.3 wants the same names for the architecture-independent packages
> as 3.3.2.3 does. Does it work with the 3.3.2.3a ones
> (dpkg-buildpackage -B)?
i just checked, ... there is no x packages in potato even on i386, it is just symlink to slink, ... i don't understand you ... What has that to do with our problem, there is 3.3.2.3a in slink and 3.3.3.1 in potato, there should be no problem about that ...
>
> > yes, he is flaming hard about the X reorg on debian-devel, ... :)
> >
> > Seriously now, if Branden don't care/don't have time/don't know what
> > happens to people not of the i386 port, that's his problem, and there
> > should be nothing breaking if you do a NMU with a dotted version, it is
> > the way things should be done, why was Branden screaming ? because the
> > xfree-3.3.2.3a-8.1 upload was broken ? Unless someone compiled it under
> > i386 and made a binary only upload of it, this should be no problem. HE
> > just would have needed to take the diff, apply it in his home tree,
> > check it, and release a xfree-3.3.2.3a-9. No big issue, isn't it ?
> > If some one made a i386 binary NMU, that is another problem, but i
> > don't think this broke something, or did it ? why the screaming then
> > ???
>
> It was broken. It was multiple sources running around not under one
> control, fixes he couldn't track down, bugs getting filed against
> versions he was not responsible for. And why do you think he doesn't
> care? He just said on -devel that half of the work he's doing for the
it was one of the alternatives, i guess the truth is that he is working on something else, ...
> -10 version is alpha and sparc support. This makes sense, since those
> architectures are frozen.
ok yes, again, this make sense for slink, but not for potato ...
>
> > ok what now ? should they go into potato or experimental, i don't
> > mirror experimental, only potato, why should i download load's of
> > outdated stuff just because branden does not like it. Is there a good
> > technical reason for them going in experimental, altough all i read, by
> > it in the policy or in developper docs, says it should go in potato ?
>
> It is a new version, the packaging is untested, the listed maintainer
> is not willing to deal with any problems. That qualifies it for
> experimental in my eyes.
ok, if i but my name under the maintainer field, will it be ok to put them in potato ... I will put a notice in the description that it is NMU, and that i take full responsability for the possible problem, as well as saying that it is not tested on anything else than ppc.
I think that this is the reason that we have both frozen and unstable at the same time, so people can fix thinks in frozen while other continue working on potato, isn't it ?
Friendly,
Sven LUTHER
Reply to: