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

Re: Unblock of packages in "could be handled by britney"

On Sat, Apr 05, 2008 at 07:25:15AM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Friday 04 April 2008, Frans Pop wrote:
> > Note that this still only one reason why we need the acks. Preventing
> > breakage is the other.
> Actually, the current klibc migration is a very nice example of this, so let 
> me elaborate.

> I hope this extended example demonstrates sufficiently why I feel that all 
> migrations of udebs should be acked by the D-I RM. And that it also 
> demonstrated that the category "could be handled by britney" is a bit more 
> complex than the name implies.

It does demonstrate that proper dependency support for udebs should be

> If proper britney support was implemented there _are_ some udebs that could 
> be done completely automatically, but there will always be cases where 
> automated checks are insufficient. At least until we completely rework the 
> dependency declarations in udebs (which would also require adding support 
> for Conflicts).

What is the status of this reworked udeb dependency handling?



Reply to: