Re: enlightenment_0.16.3-6.deb for ppc
Sergio Brandano wrote:
> >> ... by the way, yes it is *unstable*, I know it. But this must not
> >> necessarily imply that it *must* crash, right? One can also upload
> >> the new packages and leave the freedom to the others to do some
> >> beta-testing or keep the old one, right?
> > Right, but when people develop on i386 or whatever, and upload
> > source packages, which are built by autobuilders for the other
> > platforms, one should expect that things might not work.
> > I think that's one reason autobuilders are prohibited from uploading
> > to frozen/ as well as stable/.
> I perfectly agree, but you are not adding much to what I said.
> Please have a look at the directory
And you have not heard what I said: this happens on every non-i386 platform all
the time. The _all.debs get updated with the newest binary upload from the
author/maintainer who built it for i386 (or whatever). The _ppc.debs don't get
updated until the autobuilder uploads it (for unstable), or a maintainer uploads
the ppc binary for frozen or stable. Hence the problem.
This is why you need to hold the _all.debs when a _ppc.deb is built, so you can
have the same version of _all and _ppc.debs, and it won't upgrade the _all.debs
until the next time you want it to.
> Shall we conclude that ``frozen'' is, de facto, a synonym for
> ``unstable''? Or shall frozen better contain the 0.16.3-6 packages?
It should not be considered stable until it is called so. Wait another month or