Hello On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 06:47:44PM -0600, Micah Anderson wrote: *SNIP* > > I don't see why you cannot upload the updated kernel patches. The > updated kernel patches work with the old utilities fine, although you > cannot utilize the new features, it is completely backwards compatable.
Unfortunatly this is not true. The reason is that you will have problem with /proc. > Additionally, I strongly suggest that the kernel-patch-ctx be renamed > to kernel-patch-vserver as the vserver project, and the kernel patch > has not been called "ctx" since the last release from Jacques, which > was almost two years ago now. Agree. It will add some extra weeks to the upload though. > I am available to help sort out the build problems on other > architectures, if you have a failed buildd log and a package I can see > what I can do to help. The problem is that I want to verify the upload on some arches before uploading to avoid too much hassle. I do not have access to that right now. > > There are also some other issues as well but they are easier to fix. The > > other problem is that the development branch is about to change and > > debian will (hopefully soon) be released. I want a well tested vserver suite > > in Debian instead of a very fresh one with potential lot of problems. > > I disagree about this statement. The 1.9.4 release is really stable > and isn't anticipated to change radically for quite some time. According to the authors they want to make some bigger changes before they go for a beta version. > Additionally, Debian's soon-to-be-released state does not matter at > all. I understand you want to have a well tested vserver suite in > Debian Sarge for freeze, that makes perfect sense. However, there is > absolutely no reason that prohibits you from making the new version of > these utilities available in unstable. You may be wondering how you If I do that, how do you think I can make updates to sarge? It is not uncommon that minor changes is needed. Look at the changelog to see why. > keep these versions from going into Sarge, well that is simple, you > file a grave bug against them indicating that you do not want it to > enter Sarge. This has been done on a number of packages in the archive > already, a common method for continuing to move on developing and > providing the newer software *in unstable*, while the testing/sarge > version stays at the stable one that you wish to provide when Sarge > freezes. It is quite common but it is not recommended. The reason is that you can not make updates to sarge. It also give confusion for the release managers. Regards, // Ola > Micah -- --------------------- Ola Lundqvist --------------------------- / [EMAIL PROTECTED] Annebergsslingan 37 \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] 654 65 KARLSTAD | | +46 (0)54-10 14 30 +46 (0)70-332 1551 | | http://www.opal.dhs.org UIN/icq: 4912500 | \ gpg/f.p.: 7090 A92B 18FE 7994 0C36 4FE4 18A1 B1CF 0FE5 3DD9 / --------------------------------------------------------------- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
