pcp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [pcp] Comments regarding pcp_3.8.2_i386.changes

To: Paul Richards Tagliamonte <ftpmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [pcp] Comments regarding pcp_3.8.2_i386.changes
From: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2013 00:41:46 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: PCP Development Team <pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivered-to: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1059109519.8868569.1375410869085.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxx>
References: <E1V53Zd-0003Zr-Cn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1059109519.8868569.1375410869085.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>
Thread-index: KLNFIGece/itxHvsBDppKjUYKZIzavnXENKr
Thread-topic: Comments regarding pcp_3.8.2_i386.changes
Hi there Paul (and/or other deb ftp-masters),

----- Original Message -----
> ----- Original Message -----
> > Howdy,
> > 
> > Can you please confirm the licensing of
> > 
> >   pcp-3.8.2\qa\src\torture_pmns.c
> > 
> 
> These are test programs (everything below qa), and we tend to try
> keep those simple, short and to the point - they are all covered
> by the top-level COPYING file however, which states:
> ...

Didn't hear back from you on this one, and the 3.8.2 update seems
to be possibly stalled ... can you let us know where things stand?

pcp-3.8.2 was a couple of weeks ago, but more troublesome from our
point of view, 3.8.1 also added a sub-package and it also stalled
(still hasn't appeared in unstable ... since mid-June).  It is the
nature of the PCP architecture that more sub-packages are likely
to appear (3.8.3 adds Infiniband instrumentation as a sub-package),
so if there's things we can do at our end to simplify the process,
please let us know.  Many thanks!

cheers.

--
Nathan

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>