Hi Steinar, On Thu, May 05, 2005 at 06:53:41PM +0200, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote: > On Thu, May 05, 2005 at 01:48:02PM -0300, Daniel Andre Vaquero wrote: > > Is there any chance of considering an upload of autofs 4.1.4 to sarge, > > now that it is frozen? Version 4.1.4 + the patches from kernel.org fixes > > #304245 and possibly #297359. I think I should have set the severity of > > #304245 when I submitted it to at least "important", since it can be > > quite annoying for users logging in to not find their home directories, > > and it can also break the functionality of a server that runs batch jobs > > and depends of mounting directories over NFS, to cite some examples. > > If 4.1.4 cannot get in, is it possible to include the current version > > with backported fixes? > I guess you'd have to ask debian-release about this; I intended for 4.1.3 to > be the final for sarge (IIRC), but some last-minute fixes in 4.1.4 beta also > made their way through. I would not be opposed to uploading 4.1.4 final (plus > the two existing extra bug fixes) if the release team allows it, though. > debian-release: autofs 4.1.4 is a pure bugfix release (4.1.4 beta is in sarge > now); it fixes several low to medium priority bugs and introduces no new > functionality. If I uploaded 4.1.4 (with patches), would there be a > possibility of getting it accepted into sarge? autofs has, to the best of my > knowledge, no dependencies not in sarge, and no versioned depends in the > archive at all. Well, at least one user seems to think that 304245 is important enough to be worth fixing; if you agree with him, then it's fine to allow this fix in via unstable. That wouldn't apply to whatever low-priority fixes upstream has thrown into 4.1.4, however. Thanks, -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature