Re: Debian Bug#20445 disagree
On Thu, Apr 09, 1998 at 09:54:57PM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 09, 1998 at 01:09:39PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> > Brian White <email@example.com> wrote:
> > > The subject in question is whether to include these packages in "stable".
> > > "unstable" will include them for sure.
> > I think they are appropriate for "stable" provided they are classifed
> > as "Extra". That is what the "Extra" priority is for, after all.
> I happen to agree. And we also need a 2.1.x Kernel package.
> Brian, here in Germany, every Megabyte you have to download is costing real
> money. A lot of money. Please put as much on the CD as possible. Declare it
> extra, put it in an unstable dir, put warnings all over the place, but
> please include it.
Why not just include a tarball of the source rather than as a debian
package. Then people can't complain that Debian messed something up since
they did it all by themselves. To make the kernel-source package all they
would have to do is download the diff.gz and do that dpkg-source,
If we have room for the 2.1 kernel I think we should put it on since it will
save people downloading about 11MB (or 9.5? for the bz2 version).
email: firstname.lastname@example.org | Debian Linux - www.debian.org
http://www.poboxes.com/adrian.bridgett | 2.0 release soon - over 1800
PGP key available on public key servers | packages on a stable OS
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org