On Aug 11, Sam Hocevar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > No it does not *have* to work this way. I read Jakob Bohm's proposal > in #317332 (also backed by Manoj) and it seems to me like the perfect > way to fix the problem. Except for the detail that it does not work: the old version of udev could not provide all the features of the new, breaking other packages, and would require different configuration files.
> Tag the bug wontfix if you want, bug hiding the fact that the package > breaks policy by closing the bug is really not the way to do things. No, there is no policy violation and the kernel requirement has been accepted by the release team. -- ciao, Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
