sh at sourcecode.de
Thu Mar 13 11:55:47 UTC 2008
Cory K. wrote:
> Soren Hansen wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 02:00:03AM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>>> Cory's comment was a bit intemperate, but I feel your response was not
>>> at all helpful and that it really minimized Cory's extensive
>>> contributions to Ubuntu developmen.
>> But it's cool for Cory to flame doko because Cory's a developer?
> If you think that was a flame then I would say you're a tad sensitive. :P
> It comes down to why would a package be uploaded at this stage in the
> cycle that renders systems unbootable?
The package is not at fault...
The fault was to upload dpkg (2008-02-11 imho) with
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DistCompilerFlags this in mind.
Setting those flags is not good without a bunch of testing.
At least, we should have rebuilt the supported archive and generate an
not official released test release,
just for developers, to see if something breaks (which is usally the case).
Actually, there is noone to blame/flame, but this upload, with such a
little change, breaks more then just glibc.
Fact, rebuilding the archive won't show any build failures, but running
those rebuilt apps would have shown the evilness of this change.
No, just normal developer business, new stuff is good...always ;)
> I could completely see if this were months ago but a day before beta
> freeze? 4 weeks 'till release? I do understand sh*t happens but
> something this major now shouldn't.
Of course it has to happen, because without those happenings, noone
would learn from it.
For the future, this is a reference that even a bag of rice, which drops
on the floor of a house, could break something somewhere....
> I was mad. I'm human. I'm over it. Time to spend the day rebuilding 3
> machines. ;)
Repeat with us: You should not use Development Releases on production
machines, until you know that it can break (badly) !
But you are a developer and you know that, and you can deal with it :)
More information about the Ubuntu-devel-discuss