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
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