On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 11:04:48AM -0600, Zed Pobre wrote: > > > Something is seriously wrong, if a single bug that affects a single > > > arch can stop everyone else from forward. > > > > You obviously didn't read all of aj's message. How about you postpone > > your bitching along these lines until you've helped fix all the RC bugs > > in gcc 3.2 and glibc 2.3.1 that *do* affect i386? > > Not to defend Riku here, but I would point out that a mechanism to > shunt very buggy packages into experimental and replace them with a > previous known working version from snapshots would be a very useful > thing, and would have severely cut back on the amount of damage caused > by things like the recent libc6 transition. > And no, I don't have the skill or the time to write such a > mechanism. Please don't suggest that that removes any validity or > value of the suggestion.
This way the version of packges installed will bounce back and forward
again. And I'm sure there is more problems I cannot see.
AH! If that package is a lib, you must also move all packages that
depends on that lib also back.
--
Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgpgdQ9kgIyFn.pgp
Description: PGP signature
