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

Re: dinstall/debian-installer

Brian May <bam@debian.org> writes:

> > > - rose creates initial directories (actually some where missing; I can't
> > >   remember which onces were missing and which ones were misconfigured
> > >   though now).
> > 
> > rose uses the provided config file; it'd be hard for her to "misconfigure" a
> > directory
> An example: $ftpmaster/indices was not created.

That's missing, not misconfigured.  But I'll fix that.

> > Huh?  I don't think you mean melanie, she doesn't delete files.
> Yes, I was confused. The program which does delete the files though
> complians (I can't remember the name off hand).

rhona.  Yes, again, this is because you chose to edit katie.conf
rather than start from scratch or a less specialised conf file (like
security) and you left Accepted Autobuilding.  Like the other things
it defaults to off unless explicity configured in the config file.

> > I know that's non-intuitive but that's just how it is always been
> > hysterically.
> And that is documented where???

s/but/and undocumented but/.  happy?

> > > - cron.buildd is for buildd, I don't know where to get wanna-build from
> > >   so I don't use it.


> Errr... I did a google search, I search packages.debian.org, I searched
> cvs.debian.org, where else?

6th hit in google for "debian wanna-build" is a direct link; some of
the earlier ones probably would have led you there too.

> Err because I think apt-ftparchive database is the Packages.gz and
> Source.gz files, right?

no.  man apt-ftparchive, search for "database", first hit.

> I don't know why you a being so hostile.

Because damn it, it's annoying.  You're insulting about katie when you
clearly haven't looked at nearly enough to make an informed judgement
of it.  You whine about lack of documentation when you clearly haven't
looked at what there is.  You don't bother to check anything or try to
figure anything out for yourself even when you easily could.  And then
you post as if you know what you're talking about - or at least have
tried the best you could to know what you talking about - which lends
undeserved credence to your bogus statements about katie.

> I seem to be getting a clear signal back that you are not interested
> with the feedback I am giving, and that you would rather I didn't
> try.

I'm interested in constructive feedback.


Reply to: