On Monday 17 December 2007, Otavio Salvador wrote: > A debconf setting would be more interesting from my POV. I did consider that but came to the conclusion that it would be debconf abuse and also that it would not work. We are talking about a debconf setting in the _installed_ system after all, and one that should _only_ be valid while D-I is running. Please look at the problem statement and CONSIDER the issues before making random suggestions! Thanks.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.