Hi Peter, On Sat, May 21, 2005 at 01:49:21PM +0200, Peter Gervai wrote: > I was pondering this for the last week.
> First, there were no real security bugs fixed, but many small ones (like > the DoS with frames). > Second, there were lots of small annoying ones fixed (like endless refresh on > sourceforge). > Third, I just checked and there wasn't really any upstream screwups in the > last years, the new package bugs usually exist in old versions too. > Many versions are due to new upstream releases and my packaging woes. > Fourth, um, that's 0.10.4-7 we're talking about due to a problem of > type-handling (see bug #309367) which dislikes new dpkg-architecure and > I didn't notice that. (It'll be the same as -6 but with a non-screwed > control field.) > Apart from that I believe 0.10.4-7 is in far better shape than 0.9.xx, > and it is supposed to handle multiple arch compiles better (I don't > find the bug now but was related to type-handling and autotools-dev > somewhere), and contains elinks-lite, which was a long-long-long standing > wish from many people with small systems. > I am not really familiar with uploading to frozen, and who to bribe, > etc. :) I dare to say that 0.10.4-7 have good chances to stay in, any > errors there may only be related to my packaging screwups :-/ [which > seems to work right now(tm)] > What I cannot do is get the backport done (due to lack of time) and I > doubt upstream would be anything but angry to let an old version in. Ok, I'm going to go ahead and push 0.10.4-7 in, thanks. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
