Hi Adam, (long time no see!)
On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 04:13:56PM +0000, Adam Conrad wrote: > On Mon, Mar 01, 2010 at 02:00:31AM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 10:26:48AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > > > > > > You could obviously just fall back to using the full .so in the case of > > > initramfs generation. > > If we can detect that the libc generated is unsuitable, then this > fallback seems safe enough. The main problem is that this is indeed not easy to detect (otherwise this would be a non-issue). [...] > The extra upshot of this is that some of the weirder corner cases you > refer to that have bitten d-i in the past (A) have made the implementation > more robust, but more interestingly (B) new and similar issues will be > discovered and fixed more readily if this is being tested by more than > just a handful of installer builders/testers. That much, certainly, is true. I guess it is the better argument to indeed go for this option, though I would still suggest doing so in experimental first. -- The biometric identification system at the gates of the CIA headquarters works because there's a guard with a large gun making sure no one is trying to fool the system. http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/01/biometrics.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100307231723.ga3...@celtic.nixsys.be
