Re: Package configure problem during Installation.
On Sat 26 Nov 2016 at 18:40:38 +0100, Sven Hartge wrote:
> Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > For the -devel thread:
>
> > https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2016/07/msg00071.html
>
> I had a more recent thread in mind and I just found it. It was kind of
> buried inside the "When should we https our mirrors?" thread.
>
> From: https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2016/10/msg00362.html
>
> ,----[ Peter Palfrader <weasel@debian.org>
> | > TL;DR: Would we now recommend deb.d.o over httpredir.d.o for
> | > production use e.g. in base images (including for Jessie)?
> |
> | Yes.
> `----
>
> And here https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2016/10/msg00490.html one
> of the maintainers behind deb.debian.org states the "experimental" phase
> has ended:
>
> ,----[ Tollef Fog Heen <tfheen@err.no>
> | As of this morning, the bit about experimental was removed from the web
> | page.
> `----
>
> And here the reference for d-i (more precisely debootstrap) switching to
> deb.debian.org:
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2016/11/msg00006.html
>
> > I think viewing deb.debian.org as beta is fair. Viewing the redirector
> > as deprecated or about to be closed down in not correct. There is a
> > diversity of views in both threads.
>
> There are. But all more or less agree that httpredir.debian.org is
> unmaintained and just cruising along on auto-pilot.
Very informative. Either would do for me in the UK, I think (assuming
httpredir.debian.org stays around). Should we now be recommending
deb.debian.org in user now? What do we get from it for our money?
--
Brian.
Reply to: