Christian PERRIER <bubulle@debian.org> (04/12/2010): > > I unmarked this for translation. > > > > My opinion, indeed, is that if ZFS is unsafe on kfreebsd-i386, > > then partman-zfs should no tbe kfreebsd-any but only > > kfreebsd-amd64 > > As suggested by Robert, I bring this to -bsd as well. > > My main point was that adding a new debconf template to a D-I > package is, at this moment of the release process, not an > option. Particularly if that template is about warning users for > potential problems. Alternative way: keep it available on kfreebsd-i386, but do not make use/propose it from d-i (for a while)? (I didn't check how the integration in d-i is done, so I don't know what it takes to disable it for one architecture, or if that's required as well if kfreebsd-i386 is dropped from partman-zfs' architectures.) Mraw, KiBi.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature