Steve McIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, 14 Sep 1999, Adam Di Carlo wrote: > > >Why was there no announcement for 2.1r3? Is this on purpose? > > > >If someone could give me guidance on what should be noted about 2.1r3 > >in www.debian.org/releases/stable/ I'd be happy to add some stuff. > >Obviously some stuf on there is now wrong, i.e., new apt. > > > >How are plans proceeding for 2.1.1 (kernel update?) ? > > > >I lieu of that, do you think we should burn a new slink CD and/or > >boot-floppies? > > CDs are updated, at least for i386 and source (are the others done yet?). > Phil did them a couple of weekends back.
Nobody's got back to me about fixing the broken dependencies for the non-i386 architectures. I've done the source CDs though. A quick look at the things that have changed in the archive since I did the i386 images reveals that the packages don't seem to have been fixed for the other architectures. There's a problem with trn depending on new (potato) versions of ncurses, and something similar with sendmail depending on libc6.1 (>= 2.1) IIRC. Cheers, Phil.
