-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Steve Langasek a écrit : > Michael, > > Please keep the Cc: list intact when replying. > > On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 11:01:00PM +0200, Michael Fritscher wrote: >>> From my POV, the question is not whether ntfs-3g 1.0.0 should be included >>> in >>> etch (it won't be), but whether the risk of this data loss is significant >>> enough that we should consider dropping ntfs-3g from etch altogether for >>> the >>> sake of our users' data. Since ntfs-3g didn't ship with any previous >>> release, and has no reverse-dependencies in etch, it doesn't seem >>> unreasonable to drop it from the release, and that seems to be in keeping >>> with our policy of treating data loss bugs with the highest severity? > >> It killed already files for me and others. >> It is mentioned in the forum, too: >> http://forum.ntfs-3g.org/viewtopic.php?t=170&highlight= > >> Another problem is that unmounting was asyncron in these early versions, >> which can cause data loss, too. > >> So I strongly advise to drop this package, if you don't want to update it. > > That's certainly persuasive to me. Adam, is there any hope of a targetted > fix for these issues described, or are users really just safer if we drop > the package from etch? >
Not in the next days, I won't have time to backport a patch as I'm really busy now. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGE0o5HNb/igTI5bsRAugtAJ9wniwxDad1vtSt1aQ99IQpdDVk4gCfdZCx GMRUsIZblXLFrr9CEbQvaBk= =517x -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
