Re: RFH: APT
On Thu, 7 Nov 2002, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> Well, I think that is worth trying. Please go ahead and put something in
> experimental and see what happens.
It's been noted that an upload to experimental will close bugs mentioned in
the changelog. I'm not certain if I agree with this, but it's enough to make
me upload to people.d.o instead.
> There is no test suite per-say, but through all the configuration stuff
> you can create isolated test environments.
Apt is actually easier to test because of this, than dpkg.
> > Do you have more information about these problems? Do you have a way to
> > duplicate them?
> Thomas's problem package file is one, last time I tried it though it
> didn't happen here. The new gettext i18n stuff is also pretty screwed up,
> the translation files are very old. The po directory apparently doesn't
> build on SMP either because of a bad assumption I made, the make-hackary
> to fix that is unfortunately rather involved though.
Yeah, I saw this smp/po error myself. Since I'm the one that modified apt to
compile with -j anyways, it shouldn't be hard to fix.
As for Thomas' problem, is he listening? Could you clue the rest of us in
into how to duplicate it?
I suppose we should handle the translations like we do in dpkg. Before major
uploads, ping this list(and the maintainers listed in each file), for updates.
- Re: RFH: APT
- From: "Tomas Pospisek's Mailing Lists" <firstname.lastname@example.org>