Re: My impressions installing hamm [was Re: tech proposal to make manoj somewhat happy.]

To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: My impressions installing hamm [was Re: tech proposal to make manoj somewhat happy.]
From: Rob Browning <rlb@cs.utexas.edu>
Date: 27 Jul 1998 20:17:26 -0500
Message-id: <[🔎] 87n29u22qh.fsf@nevermore.csres.utexas.edu>
In-reply-to: Sudhakar Chandrasekharan's message of "Mon, 27 Jul 1998 21:44:40 +0000"
References: <[🔎] Pine.LNX.3.96.980725215639.17431B-100000@petra> <[🔎] 35BCF4C8.1DCAF70A@netscape.com>

Sudhakar Chandrasekharan <thaths@netscape.com> writes:

> 5. The weak link, measured in helpfulness of documentation, was the
> module selection section.

Can this go away when we move to the 2.2 kernel if we switch over to
using the module daemon to load all modules on demand?

-- 
Rob Browning <rlb@cs.utexas.edu> PGP=E80E0D04F521A094 532B97F5D64E3930

--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: My impressions installing hamm [was Re: tech proposal to make manoj somewhat happy.]
  - From: Wichert Akkerman <wakkerma@wiggy.ml.org>

References:
- tech proposal to make manoj somewhat happy.
  - From: "Petra, Kevin J Poorman" <ewigin@SoftHome.net>
- My impressions installing hamm [was Re: tech proposal to make manoj somewhat happy.]
  - From: Sudhakar Chandrasekharan <thaths@netscape.com>

Prev by Date: Re: Another possible slink goal (multipackages users profile)
Next by Date: Re: Fixing *other* libtool problem?
Previous by thread: Re: My impressions installing hamm [was Re: tech proposal to make manoj somewhat happy.]
Next by thread: Re: My impressions installing hamm [was Re: tech proposal to make manoj somewhat happy.]
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread