Re: Moving glibc out of unstable
On Sun, Oct 26, 2003 at 06:12:42PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> As of a few minutes ago, there's nothing left in the TODO file that I
> consider a showstopper (except for the final check of files/control
> scripts/etc on non-i386 architectures, after everything is built).
>
> I'm going to tackle a couple of the low-hanging RC bugs tonight and
> tomorrow (MIPS msq, Sparc kernel warning, something else I've forgotten).
> After that I believe the packages are ready to leave experimental. They'll
> probably need some TLC in unstable, but that has to happen eventually if
> they're to make sarge. These packages do bump the shlib dependency, so
> backing down will be messy.
>
> Does anyone else have issues that we need to address before they enter
> unstable? If so, _please_ let me know in the next day or two. Otherwise we
> should freeze CVS on (let's say) Tuesday, build and test 2.3.2.ds1-8 on as
> many architectures as possible, and upload probably straight into unstable.
>
> All comments welcome.
Everything (except the translations, which someone else will need to
take care of, and is not a regression relative to unstable) has been
taken care of.
I'm going to merge or branch to the head of the debian-glibc CVS
repository tonight, mark 2.3.2.ds1-8 as destined for unstable, and tag
it. Let's build it for those architectures we can, and put binaries in
~dan/public_html/glibc/ on ftp-master.debian.org, to move into unstable
together.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
Reply to: