Re: M68K boot floppies / CDs
Michael Schmitz <schmitz@mail.biophys.uni-duesseldorf.de> writes:
> please accept the fact that the m68k people can't fix anything on the FTP
> servers, including broken symlinks (and please accept my explanation that
> changing the current symlink to 0606 isn't even near enough). The FTP team
> needs to apply the fixes I outlined in my previous mail, that's all.
Absolutely --- I wasn't trying to say that it was your fault, just
that it really needs to be sorted out on the archive.
I also thought I was sending that mail to Anne (rather than the whole
Cc: list. Doh!), otherwise I'd have taken more care eliminating the
somewhat inflammatory language --- sorry about that.
> In conclusion: I can't fix the FTP archive, and I refuse to do anything
> more on this matter.
Well, I can fix the archive, if I get the nod from one of the
ftpmasters, but I'd rather that we worked out a way of doing this
through normal channels so this problem doesn't keep on coming up.
We don't have a great track record with non-i386 CDs, and I'd like to
see it improved.
We should be able to come up with a way of identifying, reporting and
fixing these problems in a timely manner, so lets do it so that we
don't have to go through this every release.
> I've uploaded boot-floppies updates twice already
> (the first set from mid-April made it into disks-m68k/<whatsitsname-0606>
> in June, the second from last month just got installed but is incomplete).
> I share your experience about the boot-floppies brokenness, but I for my
> part are more annoyed about the tone of discussion, and about the
> procedural hurdles, than about the occasional messup.
It seems that problems with non-i386 architectures often fall under
``Someone Else's Problem'' fields, and hence disappear from sight.
Perhaps each architecture needs someone who knows that they are
responsible for the general well being of the port, since it doesn't
seem that mentioning this sort of thing on the lists actually results
in anyone getting excited enough to actually make the problem go away.
I understand that the fact that the ftpmasters have to be involved to
sort this out puts an extra barrier in the way, but if I actually had
an m68k I'd campaign for the right to do ftpmastering activities under
the m68k tree so I could fix this sort of thing. Does something like
that sound possible? Any volunteers?
Cheers, Phil.
Reply to: