Re: NCPFS seems broken on 2.1 kernels...
[cross-posted to debian-devel to get developer's feedback]
At 09:15 AM 2/15/98 -0500, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> OK guys, I finally managed to make ncpfs-2.1.1 compile and work under
> libc6. I have just released a new package called ncpfsx. Use this
> package if you want to play around with ncpfs and kernels > 2.1.29.
> For older kernels use package ncpfs.
>Would it be more convenient to merge the ncpfs and ncpfsx packages and
>include stub scripts that check the kernel version and call the
>appropriate binary based on whether it's 2.0.x or 2.1.x? Is this
I have thought about this but have been unable to find a better solution.
The problem is that upstream ncpfs-2.0.x and ncpfs-2.1.x are different
packages and I don't know how to create a binary package (a .deb) from two
different source packages. Also, packages ncpfs and ncpfsx have lots of
binaries, not just the ncpmount and ncpumount binaries, so this will add
more complexity to these stub scripts.
If someone comes with a better solution than having two packages I am
willing to consider implementing it.
Some people suggested that I use alternatives. That looks like a good idea
for packages with a small number of binaries like packages smbfs and smbfsx
but for packages like ncpfs and ncpfsx the number of alternatives that
would need to be set up is quite large. So, in this case, I preferred to
have ncpfs and ncpfsx conflict with each other so only one can be installed
at any time.
Eloy A. Paris
Information Technology Department
Rockwell Automation de Venezuela
Telephone: +58-2-9432311 Fax: +58-2-9431645 Cel.: +58-16-234700
"Where does this path lead?" said Alice
"Depends on where you want to go." Said the cat
("Alice in Wonderland", by Lewis Carroll.)
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to email@example.com .