> Please give me your advice if packaging busybox and mklibs.sh as seperate
> packages is a good idea or not. Thanks!
> This comes to my mind because:
> 1) Seems boot-floppies won't like to come into woody (c.f. Adam)
> 2) Packages like mkinitrd-cd depends on boot-floppies solely for these two
> If it's a good idea ;-) I'd like to package 'em but I will need some further
> help! ;-) I'm currently in NM queue, I suppose. ;-)
Adam Di Carlo wrote:
> mklibs.sh should probably be it's own package, perhaps. It's a nice
> little utility and could use the work of more porters to get it
> working on more architectures. I would imagine if it is packaged
> separately, it would be easier for porters to work on.
I hereby announce my ITP for mklibs.sh. And I will need a sponsor.
Since Marcus is the author, that would be fine if you want it. ;-)