Re: cdebconf state

To: debian-boot@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: cdebconf state
From: Junichi Uekawa <dancer@netfort.gr.jp>
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2002 01:02:23 +0900
Message-id: <[🔎] 20020809010223.5438c042.dancer@netfort.gr.jp>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 2flbs8dpz5c.fsf@saruman.uio.no>
References: <[🔎] 87r8hf4kyk.fsf@arabella.raw.no> <[🔎] 20020807061634.GE8214@tausq.org> <[🔎] 87adnyr8ys.fsf@arabella.raw.no> <[🔎] 2flbs8dpz5c.fsf@saruman.uio.no>

Petter Reinholdtsen <pere@hungry.com> immo vero scripsit:

> > Well, it works. :) So, I'd rather not change it again.  Also, I
> > don't know the binary-tree stuff in glibc.  I kinda know this hash
> > library by now.
> 
> Using glibc functions would reduce the size of cdebconf, wouldn't it?

It depends. Using new symbol from glibc might increased the 
size of libc after lib-reduction.


regards,
	junichi


-- 
dancer@debian.org : Junichi Uekawa   http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer
GPG Fingerprint : 17D6 120E 4455 1832 9423  7447 3059 BF92 CD37 56F4
Libpkg-guide: http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer/column/libpkg-guide/

Reply to:

References:
- cdebconf state
  - From: Tollef Fog Heen <tollef@add.no>
- Re: cdebconf state
  - From: Randolph Chung <tausq@debian.org>
- Re: cdebconf state
  - From: Tollef Fog Heen <tollef@add.no>
- Re: cdebconf state
  - From: Petter Reinholdtsen <pere@hungry.com>

Prev by Date: Re: Design information on D-I compared to dbootstrap ? and more.
Next by Date: Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
Previous by thread: Re: cdebconf state
Next by thread: Re: cdebconf state
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread