I don't think d-d-a is meant to be used as a forum, but since others are
doing so, I guess it's fine if I join.
> With these hopefully solid plans in place for the release, we feel the
> need to acknowledge that there is an ongoing vote whose outcome could
> potentially disrupt them.
Luk is referring to 11 bugs in linux-2.6 which all have a 'patch' tag, and
which the maintainers have been ignoring so far. Option 1 wouldn't cause any
"disruption" to the release process, other than moving support for these chips
to non-free when the patches are applied. Any other delay is self-imposed.
http://bugs.debian.org/494007
http://bugs.debian.org/494009
http://bugs.debian.org/494010
http://bugs.debian.org/494308
http://bugs.debian.org/501152
http://bugs.debian.org/501153
http://bugs.debian.org/502663
http://bugs.debian.org/502665
http://bugs.debian.org/502666
http://bugs.debian.org/502667
http://bugs.debian.org/502669
I hope this helps everyone pick the options they feel most comfortable with.
Sincerely,
--
Robert Millan
The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."
Given how this vote is being conducted, I think you should clearly
ignore the result, whatever it is.
Cheers,
--
.''`.
: :' : We are debian.org. Lower your prices, surrender your code.
`. `' We will add your hardware and software distinctiveness to
`- our own. Resistance is futile.
Mmm, who is doing so? Do you mean the release team update? If so, I
don't think the update qualifies as "using devel-announce as a forum".
And even if it does, that does NOT excuse your misuse of it.
Please refrain from using the absolutely wrong list for your own
political purposes in the future.
--
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P) *
* PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer *
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dev...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
As Cyril already pointed out, Robert's post was to the devel, not to
the devel-announce, so please ignore my outburst. Sorry for the noise.
Unfortunately you forgot to also mention this bug for instance:
Romain
Thankfully, replies to mail sent to dda@ land in dd@. You fail.
Mraw,
KiBi.
No no, you were right:
| From: Robert Millan <r...@aybabtu.com>
| To: debian-dev...@lists.debian.org
But the lists are configured in a way that doesn't let that happen; I
was only pointing that Robert even failed abusing the system.
Mraw,
KiBi.
> Unfortunately you forgot to also mention this bug for instance:
>
> http://bugs.debian.org/494120
Which has been prematurely archived on 2008-08-15 while in
mid-discussion, by one party in that discussion.
--
\ “There are no significant bugs in our released software that |
`\ any significant number of users want fixed.” —Bill Gates, |
_o__) 1995-10-23 |
Ben Finney
This is partly because they've had very little testing. Some of the
testing showed serious bugs, which I believe I have now fixed, but
others may well still be present.
Again, for anyone who wants to test the latest versions of these patches
(which I have not mailed individually to the bugs, sorry), see
http://people.debian.org/~benh/firmware-removal/
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
In a hierarchy, every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence.
There's no reason to think that the array in question is not the
preferred form for modification.
There are currently 31 bugs marked lenny-ignore. As I understand things,
if option 1 makes it all those 31 need to be fixed before we can release
lenny.
Here is the list of bugs and the packages:
211765 | xorg-server
368559 | x11proto-gl
368564 | xorg-server
382175 | glibc
383465 | xserver-xorg-video-nv
391935 | xen-3
424957 | portmap
445507 | mklibs
459705 | pike7.6
477060 | texlive-base
477751 | sgml-base
483217 | texlive-base
488895 | lucene2
491354 | texlive-extra
492699 | fakeroot
494007 | linux-2.6
494009 | linux-2.6
494010 | linux-2.6
494308 | linux-2.6
495256 | cacao-oj6
498475 | net-snmp
498476 | libsmi
498631 | linux-2.6
501152 | linux-2.6
501153 | linux-2.6
502663 | linux-2.6
502665 | linux-2.6
502666 | linux-2.6
502667 | linux-2.6
502668 | linux-2.6
502669 | linux-2.6
Note that 2 of them (488895 - lucene2, 495256 - cacao-oj6) have been
fixed in unstable but not in lenny.
Kurt
> There are currently 31 bugs marked lenny-ignore. As I understand things,
> if option 1 makes it all those 31 need to be fixed before we can release
> lenny.
Some of these are technical issues rather than DFSG issues, so aren't
relevant to the GR.
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
Uh... it was archived on 2008/09/6 by the BTS itself after the bug had
been closed on 2008/8/7 and the last message was on 2008/8/8.
So no, it wasn't prematurely archived, and more than 28 days with no
discussion certainly is not mid-discussion.
Don Armstrong
--
"I was thinking seven figures," he said, "but I would have taken a
hundred grand. I'm not a greedy person." [All for a moldy bottle of
tropicana.]
-- Sammi Hadzovic [in Andy Newman's 2003/02/14 NYT article.]
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/14/nyregion/14EYEB.html
http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
> On Mon, 15 Dec 2008, Ben Finney wrote:
> > Romain Beauxis <to...@rastageeks.org> writes:
> > > http://bugs.debian.org/494120
> >
> > Which has been prematurely archived on 2008-08-15 while in
> > mid-discussion, by one party in that discussion.
>
> Uh... it was archived on 2008/09/6 by the BTS itself after the bug
> had been closed on 2008/8/7 and the last message was on 2008/8/8.
I checked carefully before sending the above message; the dates on the
bug discussion and control messages *were* as I described. Yet today,
they're as you describe. I have no ready explanation for that
discrepancy.
This thread certainly isn't the place to discuss strange observed
debbugs behaviour, though, so I'll leave it at that for now.
--
\ “I object to doing things that computers can do.” —Olin Shivers |
`\ |
_o__) |
Ben Finney