On Thu, 6 Apr 2017 00:05:17 +0200
Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> That's unfortunate, yes, but there's no easy way to keep old packages
> around in a given repository.
That's one way to think about it. Got it, keeping old modules is hard.
But I wasn't asking about keeping old modules, I see no point in
> Added tag(s) stretch-ignore.
Whatever it means, it sounds very wrong.
I see you guys like discussing workarounds, but how about, you know,
actually publishing the correct kernel for netboot in the repo?
Somebody used to do that, why isn't it the case now?
http://debian.backend.mirrors.debian.o
On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:32:46 +0200
Philip Hands wrote:
> Alexander Sosedkin writes:
>
> > On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 12:43:40 +0200
> > Philipp Kern wrote:
> >
> >> Even if we'd leave the old kernel udebs in testing for a while,
> >> you'd st
On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 12:43:40 +0200
Philipp Kern wrote:
> Even if we'd leave the old kernel udebs in testing for a while, you'd
> still hit a point where we'd need to drop them and old installers
> would break.
I can see that it's impossible to support downloading modules for all
old ISOs.
But
On Thu, 19 Jan 2017 22:14:25 +0100 Gordon Ball
wrote:
> I have upgraded the bug to severity:serious to prevent migration, so
> stretch will get 0.4.7
It looks like stretch currently lacks xonsh at all, be it 0.4.7,
broken 0.5.2 or recent 0.5.6. Will any xonsh get into stretch?
5 matches
Mail list logo
