On Sun, May 28, 2006 at 04:11:22AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Sat, May 27, 2006 at 11:12:12PM -0300, Gustavo Franco wrote: > > Do you have any opinion about #211765 ? It's really old, and has > > "sarge-ignore" and "upstream" tags, but will keep new xorg out of > > testing after we solve #367986. Are we going to ignore this for Etch > > or what? > It will not keep xorg out of testing, because a hint is in place to override > these two bugs (one being clearly a pre-existing bug, the other probably has > overinflated severity). > Looks like this hint is currently not taking effect, though; I'll look into > this to see if I can figure out why. ... as for it being ignored for etch, no, I don't see any reason why a known licensing bug should continue to go unaddressed for over three years. I think I heard that SGI has declared bankruptcy now, so maybe someone can fix this by buying the code for cheap and relicensing it :-P -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature