On Sunday 04 March 2007 06:06, Steve Langasek wrote: > It's acceptable to me; the final d-i images haven't been spun yet for > etch, and anyway a one-line change for a shlibs fix isn't exactly a big > delta so I don't see a reason to respin even if we did have version > skew. (I.e., the source requirements are still satisfied for d-i as > much as they are for any random other package that might happen to be > built against a previous version of libblkid1, no?) > > Anyway, cc:ed to Frans to get input from the d-i side. In this case it is not a problem because, AFAICT, none of the udebs built with e2fsprogs are included in any D-I initrd. I will reply separately to d-release with my reasons why I feel it would be a bad idea if it *had* been included in any initrd.
Attachment:
pgpt30u_gK2PU.pgp
Description: PGP signature