Re: Bug#500358: Fix found
On Sun, Nov 09, 2008 at 09:37:11PM +0300, Max Dmitrichenko wrote:
> 2008/11/9 Bastian Blank <waldi@debian.org>:
> >> OK, since there was no opposition and there is still no explaination on
> >> why this bug was donwgraded in the first place I'm upgrading it back to the
> >> initial severity.
> >
> > There is only a small fraction of machines affected, so this is not RC.
>
> This is not a PC case where one can assemble some unique set of components which
> will not work together well.
Hmm, my Sparc got PCI-X and PCIe. Okay, I never tried to put a random
card in it, but why should it not work?
> SPARC is a traditionally brand
> architecture. This case
> affects Ultra 5 and may be several other workstation. So if something
> doesn't function
> on one box it doesn't function on a whole generation of boxes. I think this is
> quite a big part of all Debian SPARC users.
This still does not qualify for the severity "grave":
| makes the package in question unusable or mostly so,
It still runs. And the Sparc machines I use don't show such problems.
> And if SPARC is qualified
> for release
> then this is definitely RC.
It is the decision of the maintainer if nothing else matches.
> And do not hesitate to use common sense. Refusal of fixing the bug
> should be made
> only if you are afraid of breaking something else. This patch targets
> only SPARC. It has
> absolutely no influence on other archs, so it won't break anything
> else even in the worst case.
NMUing a properly maintained package without action from the CTTE is
also a no-go.
> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=5769907ade8dda7002b304c03ef9e4ee5c1e0821
This is a different patch then
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?msg=102;filename=sparc_fix_for_debian.patch;att=1;bug=500358
Bastian
--
History tends to exaggerate.
-- Col. Green, "The Savage Curtain", stardate 5906.4
Reply to: