5.1 Release Criteria

Ken Moffat ken at kenmoffat.uklinux.net
Tue May 4 12:55:30 PDT 2004

On Tue, 4 May 2004, Matthew Burgess wrote:

> On Mon, 03 May 2004 23:12:22 -0500
> Bruce Dubbs <bdubbs at swbell.net> wrote:

> > o  Are the package versions correct?
> Aside from glibc, yes.  Having said that, it looks like linux-2.4.27 is
> due out real soon now, but I'm hesitant to lift the package freeze for
> what should be a trivial upgrade for even non-seasoned LFSers.

 Ryan's glibc ought to be good, when it arrives, but we still need to
test it multiple times (can it build from whatever hosts we have
available, and can it build itself).  Any news ?

> > o  Are the bootscripts correct?
> I've got to upgrade them to 2.0.5 but then they should be fine.

 I don't understand the issues on this one (haven't been following the
bootscripts in the last week), but is it needed for 5.1 ?

>  I/we are aiming for 2004-05-14 at the
> moment.

 We need at least a week to give bugs time to show, so please can you
prioritise these two items ?

 das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list