-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 30-03-2005 10:32, Wen-chien Jesse Sung wrote: > Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > | I don't like putting too much effort into solving this bug, then. > | > | Keeping the code relatively sane to avoid bugs hitting users of stable > | Debian releases is much more important than handling bugs hitting only > | those (possibly many) choosing to live on the edge and running testing > | releases. Especially when the workaround is simply to try installing > again. > > I guess it affects users of stable Debian releases if -8 gets into > next stable release.
I got you wrong, then. Sorry! > | I may have lost you (my mind is at several places simultanously - quite > | annoying actually, but not your fault), but the bug in -6.1 causes > | _wrong_ info in the cache file. Can't see how you will sanely handle > | that situation (without special code for that single release). > | > | As I understand it, it should always be safe to do update-inetd (or if > | not, we can't trust our own knowledge of the world, and then we should > | fail rather than go silent about it!). > > It's not about "do update-inetd or not", it's about "do update-inetd with > invalid arguments". Oh. My head is still spinning badly from working all night (on a new release of moin - payed by Ubuntu), but I will have a look at this later today. Thanks alot for your explanation - I am sure it will help me understand the issue when only I am clear in my head. - Jonas - -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ - Enden er nær: http://www.shibumi.org/eoti.htm -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFCSnmOn7DbMsAkQLgRAjyyAJ9xnYIFHo21dBDC24S0KYkkbyaoigCgjgEc 4WLIswFYY1HUiGufP2nRV/8= =IRfi -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
