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

mingetty & CVS...



First things first: I've made a package containing the mingetty
program that I mentioned earlier as a possible candidate for putting
in the base package.  I'll be dropping it on master just as soon as I
look again at the message that explains the new procedures.

Just to clarify one point about my suggestion regarding including this
as part of the base disks: _mingetty is console only_.  This may
disqualify it---while I know that I've never, ever, gotten agetty to
work reliably with any of several modems (and thus use it only as a
console getty), I also don't have any hardwired terminals.  Especially
if it is or becomes possible to run Linux with just a serial terminal,
this would tend to disqualify mingetty.

Second issue: As a result of Bdale's query a couple of weeks ago about
using CVS for packages, I've been experimenting.  Now I know CVS isn't
everyone's cup of tea, so I'll say no more than that I think it's made
things a lot easier, especially for the packages I have (like MH) that
have a lot of mods to the original sources, and that anyone who's
interested in finding out more can email me.

The sticking point (and the reason I've not yet released a couple of
the packages I've been working with) is that in restructuring the
debian.rules file to take advantage of CVS, I've rendered the 'source'
& 'diff' targets useless to anyone who doesn't isn't using CVS with
the sources configured just like I have them.

Now I've looked through the guidelines document, and I find that both
'source' & 'diff' are just _recommended_.  Is anyone going to get
their nose out of joint if I release the source packages and these
_don't_ work?  Or is it reasonable to assume that while it would be
nice if those would work everywhere, that it's not a trememdous
problem if they don't?

Mike.
--
"Don't let me make you unhappy by failing to be contrary enough...."



Reply to: