Re: NetBSD packages
> e2fsprogs (need to build an analogous ufsprogs package - does it need
> to provide: e2fsprogs?)
I think it would be best to make a virtual package called something
like rootfsprogs. Then your dependencies could look like:
xxx depends on rootfsprogs
e2fsprogs provides rootfsprogs
ufsprogs provides rootfsprogs
reiserfsprogs provides rootfsprogs
Oh, did I mention reiserfs? This would probably be a good way to ease
the transition from ext2 to reiser in the main Debian tree. Is anyone
subscribed to debian-devel (which I'm not) willing to propose this? If
not, I'll go do it myself...
> libstdc++ (NetBSD version)
I agree with the remark about GCC-3.0 here...
> sysvinit (need to decide what we're doing with this one - use BSD
> init and lose ability to switch runlevels, or port/write a System V
> style init)
I agree that SysV-style init is definitely one of the defining factors
for a Debian system, so in the long term I'd really like to see it
done. If it's more work than using BSD-init as an interim solution,
though, do that first.
"I wanted to change the world. But I have found that the only thing
one can be sure of changing is oneself."
-- Aldous Huxley
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail