Re: Who checks for bugs fixed in unstable but not in sarge?
On Thu, Aug 12, 2004 at 04:05:48PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 12, 2004 at 02:21:24PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > #237071 is _not_ required for security suports. Furthermore, there is
> > some difference between "keeping track" and "fixing everything".
>
> It's not required for security support.
>
> But it was announced that the toolchain should be in order starting
> today. That's not true if sarge lacks fixes that are already in
> unstable.
The announcement referred to the compiler toolchain. As of today, we
have current versions of gcc-3.3 and gcc-3.4 in testing, which was the
goal. grep depending on a library in /usr is totally irrelevant to that
goal.
> My understanding is:
> If you announe "next release is targetted at 19 September 2004" you have
> to ensure that all work required to achieve this goal is done.
I think you're not helping and are simply sniping. Please take it
elsewhere. Thank you.
Cheers,
--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@flatline.org.uk]
Reply to: