On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 05:14:28PM -0500, Michael Stone wrote: > On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 10:19:14PM +0100, Jeroen Dekkers wrote: > > I clearly never looked into it. I will never do it either. I only > > forgot that the Linux build system sucks. > > We have a winner. A winner of what? > If anyone forgets why people get pissed off by whiney > marginally-useful-port partisans/leeches, they can staple this one > to their monitor. I don't see why people should get pissed off when somebody says his opinion. > Aren't there enough real problems to fix that we don't have to gripe > about the naming of the damn linux kernel source package? If there is some other problem to fix doesn't mean that this one shouldn't be fixed. I don't say it's a high priority bug, but it should be fixed. > Since all the other equivalent packages have different names it > looks like the "problem" was solved. No the problem is still there. > If someone's pissed that their spiffykernel-image package can't be > called kernel-image they can moan till they're blue in the face and > I just won't care. (And I don't think I'll be the only one...) You missed the point. Kernel-image is the wrong name and that should be fixed. Jeroen Dekkers -- Jabber supporter - http://www.jabber.org Jabber ID: jdekkers@jabber.org Debian GNU supporter - http://www.debian.org http://www.gnu.org IRC: jeroen@openprojects
Attachment:
pgp0w6rbwJToX.pgp
Description: PGP signature