Re: ITP: uml -- user mode Linux port
On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 08:06:43AM +0100, Peter Makholm wrote:
> I wanted to play with uml for a while. apt-getting it would be nice so
> i porbally will get some time to play with it now.
Perhaps I should mention what's missing from the package:
1) ready-to-use root filesystem images
2) the networking tools
3) some way of stating the dependencies on kernel features
4) The more extensive documentation which may be found on the
project's website.
None of these are hard to get going, with a little bit of configuration
editing it was inconvenient and slow to test and fix, but not difficult
to fix up a root otherwise. I found that the straight filesystem images
don't quite work out of the box for me, though YMMV. So I do want to
delay packaging those for a while.
I think it might be a good idea to split these things up into separate
packages, despite the apparent interdependence. Rebuilding docs and the
network utils into the package will be awkward and/or redundant if
flavoring these things is ever enabled (are the flavoring patches for
2.4.x even out yet?). That, and the filesystem images are necessarily
quite large.
On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 08:06:43AM +0100, Peter Makholm wrote:
> And XML means eXtended ML (as in the programming language). Unique
> names doesn't exists, so just write a good one line description.
Another ML programmer? Welcome to the club!
Well, I'm going to stall on the initial upload until I hear back from
upstream. I'm aware of that I don't really need his approval, but it
would at least make me feel more confident in what I'm doing. And I'll
also need to resolve the lintian exception/policy conformance issues.
To satisfy the hungry package hounds out there, I'm slapping my
preliminary not-quite-lintian-clean versions of the packages up at:
http://www.debian.org/~wli/
Cheers,
Bill
P.S.: The upload is still going this instant, so wait maybe 5 or 10
minutes before trying to download it from there.
--
"And who knows, if you try it, maybe you find out that you like SM(L)? ;)"
-- Markus Mottl on comp.lang.functional
Reply to: