Michael Meskes wrote: > Oh come on Daniel, l-m-e-2.6 never build amd64 packages for > virtualbox-ose so far. So how can this suddenly be a reason for marking > the bug serious?
i've overseen that it's amd64 only, sorry. > Instead of pointing fingers you should do your due dilligence. Being > member of a development group means more than just removing blanks. oviously someone's gotta do it if you guys can't control your editors, as well as you also seem not to care about polluting my previous clean packaging with such things. last time i took a more active role, you were even rambling that i shall not upload a package. guess what i'm doing since? taking care about the things you don't, and stick with that for the moment. apart from that, from all the people which are listed in uploaders, i'm clearly one of the active ones, although i don't do that much. your 'blame' is totally unappropriate here. > How about giving the world an l-m-e-2.6 version that actually tries to build > amd64 packages? for your information because you're implying things you have not enough information about: 2.6.24 was intendet to be pushed to testing some weeks ago, and that quite fast because .23 was a bad kernel release and did not make it to testing. hence, l-m-e uploads were *conservative* (various reasons; amongst others, remembers that some architectures can't keep up with too frequent uploads of kernel stuff, that some architectures are even not building stuff for days, and that d-i is heavily depending on working l-m-e-2.6) so that it can migrate asap (which turned out to be different, later). when 2.6.25 enters sid, there will be new, non-conservative uploads of l-m-e with new modules/new architectures for existing modules. -- Address: Daniel Baumann, Burgunderstrasse 3, CH-4562 Biberist Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet: http://people.panthera-systems.net/~daniel-baumann/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
