Re: base-config/00dbootstrap_settings failure
David Whedon wrote:
> 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 ?
Personlly, the things I really miss at the command line with debootstrap
are aliases for unstable and testing.
The unstable -> sid link and the 2.x links should be foolproof.
On the other hand, I can see that a testing -> woody link could cause
maintainance problems for aj. If he links testing to woody now, it will
be wrong when woody is released, and he won't be able to fix it (same
catch-22 I ran into with base-config earlier).
On the gripping hand, we can't really expect a debootstrap in a released
(read out of date) version of debian to always be able to build a chroot
for unstable or testing, since those are moving targets that may change
in unpredictable ways after stable is released.
(As such, offering testing or unstable as options in the final released
version of the boot floppies might be a bad idea too, that will lead to
support headaches later. But we have to offer them now..)
see shy jo