On Mon, 2007-09-10 at 19:22 +0200, sean finney wrote: > but in any event, "lack of $feature to allow obsoleting $package" is not > really justification for allowing $package to remain in violation of policy.
Fair enough. I admit to being a little trigger-happy since this isn't the first time the question has come up. > also, i don't see how that rationale warrants lowering the severity > to "wishlist". afaik "important" is the designated severity for policy > violations that are not deemed to be rc. however i'm not going to get > into a severity pingpong over it. Sorry about that. I'm also not particularly concerned about the severity other than believing it should not be a release-critical level. Feel free to change if it you like. The important part to me is the wontfix tag, and/or (even better?) being able to mark this as blocked by a bug on whatever package (Goswin's suggestion of binutils probably makes the most sense) needs to get updated to eventually allow us to obsolete ia32-libs entirely. Bdale -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
