On Friday 30 May 2008, Otavio Salvador wrote: > This wouldn't happen if we're installing Etch s/would/should/ Good point. > and then I think we might use a > post-base-installer hook that checks the perl-base version and if it's > 5.10.0-10 it installs perl as well. One problem I see with that is that it assumes the problem will be fixed with the first new upload of perl-base. I think that's a reasonable assumption though and even if it is not at least full CD and netinst installs would stay fixed. This solution does require that we make sure perl is included on the netinst CD for beta2! > What people think about this plan? Does someone see any other > alternative? Rather than using a hook, we could also add perl as an "--include" package for debootstrap in base-installer. I think I'd prefer that as the installation of perl from a hook would probably mean the errors would still show up during that installation (unless we do not use apt-install in the hook script, but that has risks too).
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.