[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: grub (legacy) and e2fsprogs



Frans Pop <elendil@planet.nl> writes:

> On Sunday 03 February 2008, Otavio Salvador wrote:
>> Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com> writes:
>> > Hi!
>> >
>> > Please, can you make sure e2fsprogs-udeb >= 1.40.5-1 doesn't reach
>> > testing before grub 0.97-30 (just uploaded) has?  Otherwise D-I builds
>> > will fail to boot onto installed system.
>> >
>> > For details see #463236, #463123.
>>
>> I've added a note on the summary script to remember us of this
>> restriction.
>
> There's probably not much need to actually block anything as daily/weekly 
> images use the e2fsprogs-udeb from unstable anyway.
> As they also use grub from testing, that means that current daily images are 
> _already broken_ until grub migrates, so you may want to do an explicit 
> test that the new grub does work and then request an urgent hint for it.
>
> The breakage of the daily images should be added on the "D-I today" wiki 
> page! I've asked Sledge to disable the weekly CD builds until this is 
> resolved.

But lenny isn't broken since current lenny version of e2fsprogs is
still using 128 bytes as inode size.

otavio@merkel:~$ dak ls e2fsprogs|grep testing
 e2fsprogs | 1.40.2-1+lenny1 | testing-proposed-updates | source, alpha, amd64, arm, hppa, i386, ia64, mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390, sparc
 e2fsprogs |   1.40.3-1 |       testing | source, alpha, amd64, arm, hppa, i386, ia64, mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390, sparc

So weekly builds can still be build without problems.

But I agree that it could be hinted for fast migration. This helps to
get widly testing of it before we are too near of releasing.

-- 
        O T A V I O    S A L V A D O R
---------------------------------------------
 E-mail: otavio@debian.org      UIN: 5906116
 GNU/Linux User: 239058     GPG ID: 49A5F855
 Home Page: http://otavio.ossystems.com.br
---------------------------------------------
"Microsoft sells you Windows ... Linux gives
 you the whole house."


Reply to: