Re: ITP: lb, lb-scripts

[cjw44@flatline.org.uk (Colin Watson)]

Robert van der Meulen <rvdm@cistron.nl> wrote:
>Quoting Colin Watson (cjw44@flatline.org.uk):
>> This doesn't sound like a good use of tasks. Should Little Brother
>> really be one of the choices presented when a new user runs tasksel?
>You're right ;)
>
>Rephrase: 'a virtual package 'lb' will supply lb-gatherer, lb-monitor,
>lb-scripts and lb-alerter'.  Would that be better?

That sounds a lot better to me (although technically it's a meta-package
or something, like communicator, rather than a virtual package). Thanks!

-- 
Colin Watson                                     [cjw44@flatline.org.uk]