Hi, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> (2019-07-09): > I'm planning on simplifying e2fsprogs's debian/rules file, and one of > the ways I've been thinking about doing this is to stop doing a second > build just for e2fsprogs-udeb. The main difference has been disabling > features not needed for the installer, such as gettext/NLS (which is > responsible for most of the 145k difference). > > Colin suggested that I send a quick note to debian-boot to make sure > this isn't going to be problematic. Do you think this is going to be > an issue. (BTW, there has been size creep in e2fsprogs-udebs over the > years; e2fpsrogs-udeb has grown by ~140k beween Debian Jessie and > Debian Buster.) Thanks for letting us know. I haven't follow arch-specific constraints in a while (hello, armel), but I don't think this should be an issue. Worst case, I suppose we can submit a patch against e2fsprogs once it's been dh-ified to get the double build back, should that be absolutely needed? Cheers, -- Cyril Brulebois (kibi@debian.org) <https://debamax.com/> D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature