Re: [ITP/mostly packaged] hftpd
Adrian Bridgett <adrian.bridgett@zetnet.co.uk> writes:
> On Tue, May 18, 1999 at 05:09:27PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> [snip]
> > > We really should have a policy for things like this. How about adding
> > > another Provides: to kernel images (built by the excellent make-kpkg):
> > Because too many people don't use debian kernel images.
> How about only making dependant packages "suggest" the appropriate kernel
> version? That gets around this problem.
Or make it conflict with inappropriate versions? (Actually, this
would work better if kernel-image-2.0.xx provided the virtual package
kernel-image-2.0, etc., but whatever.)
> Personally I'm fairly inclined to making it a recommends after all - anyone
> who doesn't use make-kpkg deserves what they get.
I agree, let 'em roll their own or use equivs if they don't want to
use the packaging system. The argument that people can compile
libraries by hand doesn't hold water when it comes to library
dependencies, why should it hold for kernel dependencies? It's not
like make-kpkg is difficult to use, or limiting in any way.
--
Chris Waters xtifr@dsp.net | I have a truly elegant proof of the
or xtifr@debian.org | above, but it is too long to fit into
http://www.dsp.net/xtifr | this .signature file.
Reply to: