| 1 |
On Monday 11 October 2004 11:47 pm, Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 15:39, Luke-Jr wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Monday 11 October 2004 9:27 pm, Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 15:21, Luke-Jr wrote: |
| 5 |
> > > > Why isn't anyone getting 6.8.1 in the Portage tree? Seeing as how it |
| 6 |
> > > > is a security/bugfix release, I would expect 6.8.0 to remain unstable |
| 7 |
> > > > (or even masked) and 6.8.1 to be marked stable. |
| 8 |
> > > |
| 9 |
> > > Try reading the ChangeLog (grep -i security) before talking. |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> > So you are implying that 6.8.0-r1 is the same as 6.8.1 or something else? |
| 12 |
> > I see info in the ChangeLog suggesting it might have the security fixes |
| 13 |
> > merged, but according to Kito, there are PPC/OSX bugfixes w/ the DRI ATi |
| 14 |
> > |
| 15 |
> > drivers also: |
| 16 |
> > > not sure if 6.8.1 will fix the bugs with the binary ATI drivers on ppc |
| 17 |
> > > linux, but it has fixed the ATI bugs on my ppc darwin system FWIW. |
| 18 |
> > |
| 19 |
> > Are *those* fixes also present? ChangeLog doesn't suggest either way on |
| 20 |
> > non-security bugfixes. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> kito is confused, and I'm not sure where he/she got that idea. Don't |
| 23 |
> believe someone without any proof. There is absolutely nothing new in |
| 24 |
> 6.8.1 over 6.8.0 other than the security patch. Go to www.x.org for |
| 25 |
> yourself and click on Latest Release -- look at the patch. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
so why not giving it a proper release number? 6.8.1? |
| 28 |
as it technically equals (+patches) to the upstream 6.8.1 release? |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
regards, |
| 31 |
Christian Parpart. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
Netiquette: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt |
| 35 |
11:00:00 up 48 days, 22:39, 1 user, load average: 0.18, 0.19, 0.13 |
Archives