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: