On Mon, 9 Oct 2000, Wichert Akkerman wrote: > No. There already is a distinct tag in the changelog and .changes > file. Alpha is really the only architecture suffering from this > problem, all the others handle this just fine.
Yeah, but we'll eventually run into problems wrt the new glibc/db setup if this kind of practice continues. I'm sorry, but I'm of the opinion that woody developers should mostly have their systems updated by now...or am I wrong on this? If I am, perhaps that explains why some of the recent uploaded source packages are failing to build on an updated woody box (xkbsel, for example, which still is looking for /usr/include/db1/*). What happened to the days of version numbering like "1.0.1-1potato" for stable updates? Just curious... > There are faure.debian.org and alpha.debian.nl for example. I uploaded the new base-passwd package for woody only today. Once that is installed, I'll build the one for potato. C
