On Thu, 19 May 2016, Ian Jackson wrote:
> So you have a broader idea of what should be RC, in abstract terms,
> than I do.
>
> But, do you think that this specific bug should be RC ?
>From a cursory look at it, yes, I would say so.
And the patch looks like really short, so not too hard to mainta
Raphael Hertzog writes ("Re: Debian i386 architecture now requires a 686-class
processor"):
> Agreed. For me, the RC severity means "this should be fixed (before next
> stable release)". The possibility of auto-removal implemented by the
> release team is just a tool
Hi,
On Thu, 19 May 2016, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> If we treated architectures in the same way, I wonder if we would have
> any architecture other than amd64... After all that will guide our
> users to other, working, architectures.
>
> (No, I don't find "let's just drop Qt/GNOME/X11/ncurses" a
Ian Jackson writes:
> IMO the way to read "is a bug RC" is "if the bug is not fixed, would
> Debian be better without the package, than with the buggy package".
> This calls for weighing the harm caused by the bug to the people
> affected, against the benefit of the package to other users.
>
> In t
Guillem Jover writes ("Re: Debian i386 architecture now requires a 686-class
processor"):
> On Wed, 2016-05-18 at 16:57:48 +, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> > On 2016-05-18, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > > Why aren't those bugs RC?
>
> That's indeed a g
Hi!
On Wed, 2016-05-18 at 16:57:48 +, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> On 2016-05-18, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > Why aren't those bugs RC?
That's indeed a good question! It would probably be best if a neutral
party would do that. :)
> Either we give both users on old hardware a bad experience or all th
On 2016-05-18, Julien Cristau wrote:
> Why aren't those bugs RC?
Either we give both users on old hardware a bad experience or all the
users on new hardware a bad experience.
/Sune
On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 02:41:51 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Tue, 2016-05-10 at 19:17:15 -0300, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer
> wrote:
> > On Saturday 07 May 2016 13:23:30 Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > Last year it was decided to increase the minimum CPU features for the
> > > i3
Hi!
On Tue, 2016-05-10 at 19:17:15 -0300, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote:
> On Saturday 07 May 2016 13:23:30 Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > Last year it was decided to increase the minimum CPU features for the
> > i386 architecture to 686-class in the stretch release cycle. This
> > means dr
Gosh, that makes my eyes tear up a little.
Bye bye Pentium.
D.
On Sat, 2016-05-07 at 13:23 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> Last year it was decided to increase the minimum CPU features for the
> i386 architecture to 686-class in the stretch release cycle. This
> means dropping support for 586-c
On Thu, 12 May 2016 07:36:44 +0200
Marc Haber wrote:
> I would ask the maintainers to do so. I think that only a small
> fraction of NEWS.Debian actually needs to be in the "release notes".
How about add notes for release notes?
http://henrich-on-debian.blogspot.jp/2015/03/just-idea-automated-
On Sat, 2016-05-14 at 10:01 +, Niels Thykier wrote:
> For future reference, we updated the release-notes after the Jessie
> release. Examples include:
>
> *
> https://www.debian.org/releases/jessie/amd64/release-notes/ch-information.en.html#systemd-sigkill-regression
>- Discovered post J
Christoph Biedl:
> Niels Thykier wrote...
>
>> I appreciate it was (hopefully) not your intention. But with that
>> remark you make me feel like I have wasted my time and effort trying to
>> the write the Jessie release notes.
>
> Niels,
>
> offending you was certainly the least of my interests
Marc Haber:
> On Mon, 9 May 2016 18:42:52 +, Niels Thykier
> wrote:
>> [...]
>
> Maybe we should introduce a BTS tag "release notes" so that (1) bug
> reports of such gotchas can be flagged appropriately and (2) it is
> easily possible to track such reports and thus checklist the release
> no
On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 12:28:07PM +0200, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> If you wonder about the wording of the last paragraph:
> > --
> > How to exploit the Bible for weight loss:
> > Pr28:25: he that putteth his trust in the ʟᴏʀᴅ shall be made fat.
>
> That proverb (I guess quoted from the King Jam
On Thu, 12 May 2016, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Perhaps that could be addressed by extending apt-listchanges with an
> option to take the APT auto-install flag into account (man apt-mark) and
> skip packages that are flagged as auto-installed.
Yes, I thought the same and I thus filed #824168.
Ei
On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 10:32:57AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Quoting Adam Borowski (2016-05-12 08:16:29)
> > On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 01:54:04PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >> If someone has time and willingness, reviewing the contents of
> >> NEWS.Debian across all packages for the stable
On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 09:26:18PM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> Too bad, there has been a misguided change to apt-listchanges recently: if
Somehow I doubt you will convince anyone to follow you into the light
if you keep that "I know how it should be, subject to my will you
misguided maintainer i
Quoting Adam Borowski (2016-05-12 08:16:29)
> On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 01:54:04PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> If someone has time and willingness, reviewing the contents of
>> NEWS.Debian across all packages for the stable -> testing delta
>> before the release sounds like a very useful thing to
On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 01:54:04PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> If someone has time and willingness, reviewing the contents of NEWS.Debian
> across all packages for the stable -> testing delta before the release
> sounds like a very useful thing to do.
>From what I've seen, this is very close to o
On Wed, 11 May 2016 13:54:04 -0700, Russ Allbery
wrote:
>Marc Haber writes:
>> On Wed, 11 May 2016 10:18:05 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
>>> NEWS.Debian was the solution created for that problem, and it's not
>>> bad. It can be a bit too verbose in a few cases, but it's almost
>>> always worth
Marc Haber writes:
> On Wed, 11 May 2016 10:18:05 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> NEWS.Debian was the solution created for that problem, and it's not
>> bad. It can be a bit too verbose in a few cases, but it's almost
>> always worth reading carefully.
> I'd still like to have something that is
On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 07:27:30PM +0200, Christian Seiler wrote:
> At least on my system (default configuration) apt-listchanges shows
> only NEWS.Debian, not changelog.Debian. The only qualm I have with
> it is that there appears to be no option to abort the install after
> apt-listchanges displa
2016-05-11 18:27 Christian Seiler:
On 05/11/2016 07:01 PM, Marc Haber wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 17:03:05 +0200, Nicolas Dandrimont
wrote:
* Marc Haber [2016-05-11 10:47:52 +0200]:
We could have a "show-release-notes" package containing a script that
scans (pre-upgrade) the installed packag
On Wed, 11 May 2016 10:18:05 -0700, Russ Allbery
wrote:
>Marc Haber writes:
>> apt-listchanges drowns the user in the change logs, most of which are
>> irrevant. I think of a solution that will show text that has been vetted
>> by the package maintainer _and_ the release teams and that documents
On 05/11/2016 07:01 PM, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Wed, 11 May 2016 17:03:05 +0200, Nicolas Dandrimont
> wrote:
>> * Marc Haber [2016-05-11 10:47:52 +0200]:
>>
The third reason is the question of how much in detail the release
notes should actually be. In a strange way in the past they were
On May 11, Russ Allbery wrote:
> NEWS.Debian was the solution created for that problem, and it's not bad.
> It can be a bit too verbose in a few cases, but it's almost always worth
> reading carefully.
It would help if more people opened bugs on packages with NEWS.Debian
content which is not act
Quoting Marc Haber (2016-05-11 19:01:03)
> On Wed, 11 May 2016 17:03:05 +0200, Nicolas Dandrimont
> wrote:
> >* Marc Haber [2016-05-11 10:47:52 +0200]:
> >
> >> >The third reason is the question of how much in detail the release
> >> >notes should actually be. In a strange way in the past they we
Marc Haber writes:
> apt-listchanges drowns the user in the change logs, most of which are
> irrevant. I think of a solution that will show text that has been vetted
> by the package maintainer _and_ the release teams and that documents
> possible breakage during updates only. At this point, I do
On Wed, 11 May 2016 17:03:05 +0200, Nicolas Dandrimont
wrote:
>* Marc Haber [2016-05-11 10:47:52 +0200]:
>
>> >The third reason is the question of how much in detail the release
>> >notes should actually be. In a strange way in the past they were too
>> >short. That made me reluctant to suggest e
* Marc Haber [2016-05-11 10:47:52 +0200]:
> >The third reason is the question of how much in detail the release
> >notes should actually be. In a strange way in the past they were too
> >short. That made me reluctant to suggest entries for low-popcon
> >packages as their significance doesn't matc
On Wed, 11 May 2016 00:31:00 +0200, Matthias Klose
wrote:
>On 11.05.2016 00:17, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote:
>> On Saturday 07 May 2016 13:23:30 Ben Hutchings wrote:
>>> Last year it was decided to increase the minimum CPU features for the
>>> i386 architecture to 686-class in the st
On Tue, 10 May 2016 08:13:40 +0200, Christoph Biedl
wrote:
> Why is feature X in the new Debian release broken?
> Because you haven't read the release notes.
>(Same for NEWS.Debian)
Would you instead want the text part from release notes and/or
NEWS.Debian pasted in IRC?
>While technically true,
On Mon, 9 May 2016 18:42:52 +, Niels Thykier
wrote:
>But with that
>remark you make me feel like I have wasted my time and effort trying to
>the write the Jessie release notes.
You have not wasted your time. I do read the release notes, but I have
to admit that I only do so _after_ the releas
On 11.05.2016 00:17, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote:
On Saturday 07 May 2016 13:23:30 Ben Hutchings wrote:
Last year it was decided to increase the minimum CPU features for the
i386 architecture to 686-class in the stretch release cycle. This
means dropping support for 586-class and
On Saturday 07 May 2016 13:23:30 Ben Hutchings wrote:
> Last year it was decided to increase the minimum CPU features for the
> i386 architecture to 686-class in the stretch release cycle. This
> means dropping support for 586-class and hybrid 586/686
> processors[1].(Support for 486-class process
Niels Thykier wrote...
> I appreciate it was (hopefully) not your intention. But with that
> remark you make me feel like I have wasted my time and effort trying to
> the write the Jessie release notes.
Niels,
offending you was certainly the least of my interests. If I did, please
accept my apo
On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 09:46:31PM +0200, Christian Seiler wrote:
> tl;dr: The Jessie release notes were very helpful to me. Thanks!
each release the release notes were quite very helpful, thanks indeed!
and to add something: I agree that writing the text is the hardest part,
whatever the tool is
Adam D. Barratt:
> On Mon, 2016-05-09 at 21:44 +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote:
>> On Mon, May 9, 2016, at 20:42, Niels Thykier wrote:
>>> * We are too few to write the release-notes to keep track of all the
>>>relevant parts for a release.
>>>- HELP IS VERY WELCOME!
>>
>> Can we make the entry b
On Mon, 2016-05-09 at 21:44 +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote:
> On Mon, May 9, 2016, at 20:42, Niels Thykier wrote:
> > * We are too few to write the release-notes to keep track of all the
> >relevant parts for a release.
> >- HELP IS VERY WELCOME!
>
> Can we make the entry barier to contribute t
On 05/09/2016 08:42 PM, Niels Thykier wrote:
> I appreciate it was (hopefully) not your intention. But with that
> remark you make me feel like I have wasted my time and effort trying to
> the write the Jessie release notes.
I would like to say that I did very much appreciate the Jessie release
n
On Mon, May 9, 2016, at 20:42, Niels Thykier wrote:
> * We are too few to write the release-notes to keep track of all the
>relevant parts for a release.
>- HELP IS VERY WELCOME!
Can we make the entry barier to contribute text lower? I see several
options as:
1. Use some (argh non-free)
Hi,
Christoph Biedl:
> No big surprise. Given the amount of unneeded information combined
> with the experience several gotchas were missing ... I've stopped
> reading them. Several other people probably too.
>
* I agree there is a lot of boilerplate text and I would be happy to
restructure
Agustin Martin wrote...
> On Sun, May 08, 2016 at 07:17:53PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> > On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 6:21 PM, Holger Levsen wrote:
> >
> > > running unstable is not for users who don't know how to deal with
> > > breakage. dealing with breakage involves reading d-d-a.
> >
> > I was th
On Mon, 2016-05-09 at 12:40 +0200, Hans wrote:
> Hi Ben,
>
> since 4 weeks I have the problem, that a build kali-live system, which
> depends
> on debian, crashes at boot. A native installed kali works well.
>
> They claim, the problem shall be my cpu's, but the livefile is crashing on my
> A
Hi Ben,
since 4 weeks I have the problem, that a build kali-live system, which depends
on debian, crashes at boot. A native installed kali works well.
They claim, the problem shall be my cpu's, but the livefile is crashing on my
AMD Turion 64 X2, as well on my older K8 cpu. IMO these cpu's sho
On Sun, May 08, 2016 at 07:17:53PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 6:21 PM, Holger Levsen wrote:
>
> > running unstable is not for users who don't know how to deal with
> > breakage. dealing with breakage involves reading d-d-a.
>
> I was thinking to give users running affected h
Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Sun, May 08, 2016 at 10:44:29AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
>> d-d-a is mostly for developers, you might like to reach our users via
>> the Debian publicity team:
> running unstable is not for users who don't know how to deal with
> breakage. dealing with breakage involves r
On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 6:21 PM, Holger Levsen wrote:
> running unstable is not for users who don't know how to deal with
> breakage. dealing with breakage involves reading d-d-a.
I was thinking to give users running affected hardware more warning
than reading the release notes in the next stable
On Sun, May 08, 2016 at 10:44:29AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> d-d-a is mostly for developers, you might like to reach our users via
> the Debian publicity team:
running unstable is not for users who don't know how to deal with
breakage. dealing with breakage involves reading d-d-a.
--
cheers,
On Sat, May 7, 2016 at 8:23 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> Last year it was decided to increase the minimum CPU features for the
> i386 architecture to 686-class in the stretch release cycle.
d-d-a is mostly for developers, you might like to reach our users via
the Debian publicity team:
https://wik
On Sat, 2016-05-07 at 13:45 +0100, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Ben Hutchings wrote:
> >
> > Last year it was decided to increase the minimum CPU features for the
> > i386 architecture to 686-class in the stretch release cycle. This
> > means dropping support for 586-class and hybrid 586/
Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> I seem to remember last time this was discussed, GNU `as' avoids using a
> particular 686-class instruction
I found a reference for that:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2015/09/msg00617.html
So it seems the "nearly 686" Geode LX/NX may still work after this
chan
Hi,
Ben Hutchings wrote:
> Last year it was decided to increase the minimum CPU features for the
> i386 architecture to 686-class in the stretch release cycle. This
> means dropping support for 586-class and hybrid 586/686
> processors[1].(Support for 486-class processors was dropped, somewhat
>
54 matches
Mail list logo
