Re: debian packages for 4.04/02 ?

From: Christian Holm Christensen <cholm_at_nbi.dk>
Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2005 10:59:51 +0200


Hi Gerhard,

On Wed, 2005-06-01 at 09:51 +0200, Gerhard Brandt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Now that the bug with with libAfterImage seems fixed,
> are there fixed debian packages for 4.04/02 available somewhere?

Not to my knowledge.

> (I checked Christians homepage and the PAIPIX site but couldn't
> find any)

The packages on my web-site are terribly out of date (in fact, I should remove them to not cause confusion). I don't know about the PAIPAX site, and how often they update.

> If not, is there a cvs tag that includes the fix?

HEAD :-)
> Generally, what is the stance on including debian packages
> in the ROOT release procedure? I would be very much in favour
> of that.

I second that. In general, I think it would be a good idea for ROOT to make RPM and Debian packages as part of the release procedure. It shouldn't be that hard. I've made a prototype page for apt-get (both Debian and Scientific Linux) which Fons has access to, and can look at to see how it's done. To make Debian packages, the ROOT team obviously need a Debian machine :-) I would suggest making packages for `stable'. BTW, Sarge is due to be released at any moment now!

Perhaps it we (at roottalk) could take a vote on whether or not we'd use RPMs or Debian packages released by the ROOT team - all those in favour say `Aye' - no, please don't - we don't need 1000+ mail to roottalk saying `I want RPMs/Debs' :-) But it would good to know what the demand is.

Yours,

-- 
 ___  |  Christian Holm Christensen 
  |_| |  -------------------------------------------------------------
    | |  Address: Sankt Hansgade 23, 1. th.  Phone:  (+45) 35 35 96 91
     _|           DK-2200 Copenhagen N       Cell:   (+45) 24 61 85 91
    _|            Denmark                    Office: (+45) 353  25 404
 ____|   Email:   cholm_at_nbi.dk               Web:    www.nbi.dk/~cholm
 | |
Received on Wed Jun 01 2005 - 11:00:37 MEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Tue Jan 02 2007 - 14:45:08 MET