Re: linux-kernel-di-powerpc-2.6_1.24_powerpc.changes REJECTED
> > > The only reason was :
> > >
> > > reject as requested by debian-boot
> >
> > Someone should be in the position to explain the reasons for this.
>
> Well, it was not Ganneff, or at least he told me so, i don't know more from
> the ftp-masters.
>
> Frans has said that he requested the reject because i am not the d-i powerpc
> porter.
Well, who is?
I'll take note of that, and make sure I never accidentially upload a d-i
package for m68k. Come to think of it, most packages are autobuilt anyway,
which goes to show the whole argument is sick.
> > I see. Is the installer smart enough to pull packages from more than one
> > archive? That would permit you to only place the modified udebs in your
> > forked archive, and pull the rest from the official archives.
>
> Well, no, the d-i is not smart enough to pull packages from more than one
> location, or we would have been able to solve the non-free firmware issue
> properly.
>
> I guess i could implement that fix in the local version though :)
Please do - even though I suspect the fix will never make it into the
release. The firmware issue is meant to not be solved IMO.
> > Absent this, powerpc users can only file 'this is broken' bugs. Should be
> > done anyway, IMO.
>
> Yeah, but if i don't fix them, who will, like :
>
> #397973: [powerpci/mac] partman-md appears to not write back the raid flag
> to partitions.
>
> Open since 16 days, and not a single comment on it.
No doubt about that. But that will at least place d-i in a position where
they have to acknowledge there are loads of bugs in their package, plus
they do nothing about it, not even apply patches from the BTS.
Michael
(contemplating to switch to ubuntu finally, as the Debian development
process now appears to be broken by design at least as it relates to
powerpc)
Reply to: