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

Re: kernel-image and epoch

On Fri, Sep 22, 2000 at 09:12:49AM +1200, Michael Beattie wrote:
> Instead of being stubborn, how about you take on people's opinions and
> things, and use them to your advantage?

If I seem stubborn to you, perhaps it's because you haven't been trying
hard enough :)

> 1) I would imagine 90% of developers feel epochs are the most evil things
>    since sliced bread. the other 10% probably dont know about them.

That may be true, but I don't see how this matters.

> 2) kernel-package does not cope well with epochs. and there is no easy way
>    around this. to ease the situation, not having epochs on the kernel-image
>    packages would help.

Huh? I haven't been talking about kernel-package at all.  What I said is
that people who'd like to keep their custom-built kernels should put them
on hold.

> 3) just because bash does things differently, doesnt mean that you shouldnt
>    adjust apt-move to cope with that.

Indeed, I will do that before woody becomes stable if the problem persists.
But at this point in time, I fully anticipate for the problem to go away
before then.

> 4) People are more likely to respect you.

Can't comment on that :)

> 5) It may be a shock to you, but you are not the most knowledgable
>    Developer. Neither am I. So, your ultimate decisions are not going to be
>    always correct.

Sounds like a truism.

> Oh, and it is nice to explain why you close bugs instead of blindly closing
> them.

To the best of my knowledge I've been doing that.
Debian GNU/Linux 2.2 is out! ( http://www.debian.org/ )
Email:  Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt

Reply to: