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

Bug#484873: marked as done (packages.qa.debian.org: should it still list oldstable?)

Your message dated Wed, 31 Oct 2012 06:52:26 +0000
with message-id <20121031065226.GB12985@master.debian.org>
and subject line packages.qa.debian.org: should it still list oldstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #484873,
regarding packages.qa.debian.org: should it still list oldstable?
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
484873: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=484873
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: qa.debian.org
Severity: normal

As of now, oldstable is no longer supported (security-wise).

I wonder whether it should still be listed on p.q.d.o pages in such
situations, which might be misleading to out users.

(side comment: I think that the drop of support for oldstable has not been
announced widely enough)

-- System Information:
Debian Release: lenny/sid
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.24-1-686 (SMP w/1 CPU core)
Locale: LANG=fr_FR.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
So far most people prefer to keep oldstable on the PTS.  The bug has been
tagged wontfix since 2008.  Closing now.  Feel free to reopen when new aspects
to consider surface.

--- End Message ---
Reply to: