Re: base-config/00dbootstrap_settings failure
> This will certianly work, but I still don't understand why that code is
> so fond of the release names, when with a simple change to debootstrap, it
The code is fond of release names because :
1 - that's what debootstrap wanted
2 - that is a common way of talking about releases, which is probbly why
debootstrap wanted it.
I don't have strong feelings, and in fact I had to bend over backwards to make
the volatile stable, testing names work in a somewhat sane way. So do we want de
bootstrap to accept 2.1/2.3/2.3 as well as slink/potato/woody ? Perhaps 3 symli
nks in /usr/lib/debootstrap/scripts ?
> seems it could ignore them entirely, and present the unchanging trio of
> "stable, testing, unstable", with perhaps some old stuff like "Debian
> 2.1" and "Debian 2.2" if that is wanted.