[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Graphical D-I test install

Frans Pop wrote:
On Wednesday 18 October 2006 22:55, Eddy Petrișor wrote:
Is either that or having a great installer which sucks just because we
have a _really_ crappy partitioner. And I don't think anybody can
argue, while being serious, that we didn't have lots of reports
complaining about the partitioner being crappy (I am not sure, but I
think this was one of the reasons behind partitioning recipes).

Eddy, please be constructive instead of crapping on things. As long as _you_ don't come up with any new solutions, you just *do not* have the right to use language like this.

True, this was not constructive... but honestly I didn't saw my remark as "crapping on things"; anyway, I thought the original claim from Otavio that having another partitioner in the G-I, instead of partman, would lead to problems which do not out-weight the benefits of having a replacement for partman, which is unintuitive, to say the least. Even if that would mean different partitioners for the newt and gtk interfaces.

I don't know what others thing about this but I think would be better
to have a common partitioner for all frontends to avoid that kinda of
complication in D-I release and development.
In that case I guess Xavier just wasted his time on the C port of

No, he did not. It just has to be picked up after the release of Etch.

Isn't Xavier's partitioner GTK only? If so, that's why I said that (in the light of what Otavio said), Xavier's work is in vain.

AFAIR, the reason why C++ is not supported in D-I is because the
maintainer of libc++ didn't answer to the request to create udebs...
and not having libc++ in D-I just because the maintainer didn't created
udebs is another proof that Debian has a lot of work to do WRT

No, the reason is because the whole idea of having c++ in d-i is insane and was vetoed. When you make outrageous claims like this, at least make sure you get your facts right.

Weird, I am quite sure (since I was a little bit shocked about it) I have heard this conversation about C++ support, while in Extremadura in January, and was between you and Sven. I have replied in the light of what I heard then. If this is incorrect, I apologize (still I wonder where from could I have heard such a claim, since I am sure I have heard it personally).

For your information: it was exactly mails like this that got Sven's commit rights revoked. Please don't follow his example.

I'd rather not comment on this one.

"Imagination is more important than knowledge" A.Einstein

Reply to: