Let's Discuss Interim Releases (and a Rolling Release)
steve.langasek at ubuntu.com
Mon Mar 4 20:46:11 UTC 2013
On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 12:42:30PM -0800, Scott Ritchie wrote:
> On 3/3/13 4:54 PM, Colin Watson wrote:
> >On Sat, Mar 02, 2013 at 11:36:45AM +0100, Nicolas Delvaux wrote:
> >>On Fri, 2013-03-02 at 09:32 +0000, Colin Watson wrote:
> >>>I'm surprised, because when I hunt around for people talking about
> >>>their experiences running raring I've generally found them favourably
> >>>contrasting its stability with that of prior development releases.
> >>>Indeed I hear that one group (the French loco, was it?) started
> >>>referring to it as "boring", which IMO is an excellent result. :-)
> >>For example, in the last few hours, French testers have complained about
> >>packages such as Skype or Wine that were removed by a dist-upgrade.
> >I would be happy to debug such things given the output of 'apt-get -o
> >Debug::pkgProblemResolver=true dist-upgrade'. (The last such example I
> >saw turned out to be due to raring-proposed being erroneously enabled,
> >and disabling it fixed the problem.)
> Likely one of:
> In this case I suspect I need to SRU the fix to 12.10 because apt
> will in some cases look at the recommends of the currently installed
> package rather than the to-be-upgraded-to package when doing
apt should never do that, and that would be a major bug that we should fix.
Do you have a bug reference for this behavior in apt (preferably with a
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/
slangasek at ubuntu.com vorlon at debian.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the ubuntu-devel