On Jun 17, Ian Murdock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't doubt there were changes, even some worthwhile changes, > between the version of libc in sarge and the versions in > hoary/breezy. My question is: Are the changes worth breaking > compatibility? It's a cost/benefit thing. And if they're > important enough, why aren't they going into Debian directly? You may want to ask the Debian glibc team. Or understand that different distributions may have different goals and priorities.
> I understand why Ubuntu was moving ahead of Debian before, since > Debian was so far behind. But now that sarge is out, don't > you think it would be worthwhile to give Debian a chance to fix its > release cycle problems and, better yet, to try to help fix them, > rather than simply saying "Debian is too slow/unpredictable for us"? Considering the track record of past debian releases, I'd say no. > Again, as I've said before, it's *sarge* the rest of the world thinks > of as Debian, not sid. So, "we're getting out patches into Not since sarge has been about 1-2 years late. -- ciao, Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
