Ian Murdock writes ("Re: Release management and package announcements"):
> I agree with Ian--putting the debian-1.0 tree under private makes it
> difficult for it to double as our bleeding edge a.out distribution.
> (If we had a separate a.out bleeding edge tree, I'd agr
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 95 22:05 GMT
From: Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Bruce Perens writes ("Re: debian-1.0 "):
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> > it might create problems for the mirrors.
>
> I think that while it is in its current state, 1.0 should not be where
> mirrors will fi
> > > > Agreed. I don't think the location should be decided by individual
> > > > package maintainers, though they will be free to suggest a location.
> > >
> > > The Section field from the control file can be used for this.
> >
> > If the SECTION field is not going to reliably contain the sec
Bill Mitchell writes ("Re: Release management and package announcements"):
> Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > >Somehow the FTP site maintainer's programs also need to know which
> > >section (subdirectory) the files should go in. I
J. H. M. Dassen writes ("Re: Release management and package announcements"):
>[Ian Murdock writes:]
> >From: Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> >I think we should start with an a.out 1.0 tree. This will give us a
> >bleeding edge
Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> >Somehow the FTP site maintainer's programs also need to know which
> >section (subdirectory) the files should go in. I suggest that this
> >information be provided by the `overrides' file on the FTP site, which
> >is already used by the npd
>From: Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>Ian Murdock writes ("Re: Release management and package announcements"):
>> Are we going to start with an a.out 1.0 and migrate to an ELF 1.0?
>> If so, I'd agree that this is what we should do (an
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 95 13:16 GMT
From: Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Ian Murdock writes ("Re: Release management and package announcements"):
> Are we going to start with an a.out 1.0 and migrate to an ELF 1.0?
> If so, I'd agree that this is what we
Ian Murdock writes ("Re: Release management and package announcements"):
> Are we going to start with an a.out 1.0 and migrate to an ELF 1.0?
> If so, I'd agree that this is what we should do (and what I'll do
> if we all think this is the best option).
I think we s
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 95 01:04 GMT
From: Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
If this is true then we need to copy the whole of the binary area from
0.93 to 1.0, so that 1.0 instantly becomes the `bleeding-edge'
distribution.
Are we going to start with an a.out 1.0 and migrate to an ELF 1.0
On Sun, 29 Oct 1995, Ian Jackson wrote:
> We need to decide what information the package maintainer needs to
> supply to the FTP site maintainer for the correct placement of the
> package.
>[...]
> I don't particularly care about how this is represented in the
> (machine-readable) dchanges forma
11 matches
Mail list logo
