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

Re: Icedove

Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 11:17:36AM -0600, Art Edwards wrote:
Icedove/testing appears to be seriously broken. There was a post about downgrading to icedove/stable. However, I got a segfault when I tried that. I would suggest that certain core applications have more rigorous requirements placed on them before the get into testing. I know that there are all kinds of warnings, but
the (much) longer intervals between stable releases means many rely on 
testing for hardware compatibility.
yours is at least the second icedove related mail today. Have you
reported a bug? That is the purpose of testing -- to highlight bugs so
they can be fixed. 

It is certainly not an *obligation* of those running testing to report
bugs, but if they don't then the package will end up broken in the
next stable. This, of course, is supposed to happen in unstable as
well, to keep the number of bugs in testing down, but obviously no one
running unstable has run in to this problem in time to keep the bug
from propogating into testing. 

What version Icedove? I'm running version (20070329) and so far, so good. I am also updating from testing/Lenny.



"If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about the answers." - Thomas Pynchon, "Gravity's Rainbow"

Reply to: