Re: stable with 2.2.11 (was Re: Stable release management)
On Mon, 23 Aug 1999, Adam Di Carlo wrote:
> I agree -- it's fine to upgrade to kernel 2.2.x in slink, but
> upgrading libc is just too much of a radical step. Lets do it one
> step at a time, ok?
yep. linux 2.2 is a very much needed upgrade. glibc2.1 certainly isn't.
> So the short list of upgrades:
>
> * kernel to 2.2.x (personally, I think 2.2.11 is acceptable and
> 2.2.10 is not (2.2.10 has NFS server crashes which I've experienced)
There are some oddities with .11 as well, so I'd rather wait for 2.2.12.
> * any upgrades req'd for kernel 2.2
yes.
> * pcmcia
needed by the upgrade.
> * X11
upgrade to 3.3.4.
> Anything else? I hope not....
util-linux (current slink version is supposed to have y2k problems).
GNOME 1.0
(everyone complained the GNOME 0.3 shipped with slink was hardly
usable; since there has not been too many complaints with the GNOME update
for slink released a few months ago, it will be merged in slink).
> I think if we try to do too much in the stable updates, developers will
> get justifiably upset, pointing out that we're distracting effort from
> getting potato out.
indeed; but OTOH, if we don't upgrade enough packages, it's not worth the
trouble ;).
--
- Vincent RENARDIAS vincent@{{ldsol,pipo}.com,{debian,openhardware}.org} -
- Debian/GNU Linux: http://www.openhardware.org Executive Linux: -
- http://www.fr.debian.org Open Hardware: http://www.exelinux.com -
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-"Microsoft est à l'informatique ce que le grumeau est à la crêpe..." -
Reply to: