On Sep 15, 2016, at 10:43 PM, Vagrant Cascadian <vagr...@debian.org> wrote:

> Control: severity 837629 serious
> On 2016-09-14, Rick Thomas wrote:
>> On Sep 14, 2016, at 5:31 PM, Vagrant Cascadian <vagr...@debian.org> wrote:
>>> Worst case, we have to remove it from stretch again if it really is that
>>> bad...
>> I’ll certainly do the test.  If it still doesn’t work on the OpenRD, I
>> would not remove it from stretch just yet.  Frankly, there just aren’t
>> that many OpenRD machines out there, and it works on everything else
>> we’ve tested it on — including my non-ESATA SheevaPlug.  If we can’t
>> fix it for OpenRD, we’ll have to put a warning in NEWS.Debian, but
>> IMHO that’s not a reason for denying its benefits to all the other
>> machine types.
> No, a warning in NEWS.Debian is not good enough; I meant removing the
> targets that "brick" devices. There's no point in shipping something
> known to be broken in ways that cause boot failures.

That would work, too.

> At one point I disabled the OpenRD* targets as it was failing to
> build... now we're in a similar situation, only they fail to boot at all
> even though they build, which is considerably more dangerous...
> Upgrading the severity to prevent migration to stretch, until we have
> a better handle on the situation…

OK.  I’ll do the test ASAP (probably Friday or Saturday).  Please let me know 
if there’s anything else I can do to help get this debugged.  I’ll also try it 
on my OpenRD “Client” machine, incase the problem is specific to that one 

> live well,
>  vagrant

Reply via email to