On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 9:03 PM, John Goerzen <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 01:15:20PM +1000, Trent W. Buck wrote: > > Perhaps I've misunderstood. Isn't 0.5.0.0 zlib's release version (as > > well as its API version)? That is, you cannot have two tarballs on > > hackage both called zlib-0.5.0.0.tar.gz. > > There's nothing that says we can't backport the fix for zlib just like > we do for other things. > I'm not sure I understand exactly how this answer addresses the question - does a backport give the new upstream version of zlib with the fix a different version number? Does it involve modifying the dependencies of haskell-platform? > > > > >> Similarly, is Debian Stable expected to have an installable version of > > >> (and old version of) haskell-platform? If so, near to release time it > > >> will be necessary to prevent ANY package updates migrating from > unstable > > >> to testing if they will break the current haskell-platform. > > > > > > If they break the current haskell-platform, is that not good? I don't > > > see a problem. > > > > Are you saying that you expect haskell-platform to only be installable > > on Debian Testing; that it simply won't be available (even an old > > version) in the next Debian Stable release? > > > > -- > John Goerzen > Author, Foundations of Python Network Programming > http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1590593715 > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact > [email protected] > >
