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

Re: Bug#219582: ITP: linux -- Linux 2.4 kernel

Robert Millan <zeratul2@wanadoo.es> writes:

> On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 08:56:38AM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
>>  As an academic exercise this is fine and dandy, but having two
>>  competing packagings of the same _basic_ component can't do us any
>>  good.
> This isn't a "competing" package. As I said before, the standard way Linux
> kernel packaging is handled is "a good choice for the power user". I don't
> intend to "replace" it or the like, just add more options for the people who
> like them.

Having options for the sake of having options is, frankly, a hideously
stupid design doctrine.  Whose life will this package make easier?  As
a user, I have never been confused by Debian's "normal" Linux kernel
packages.  What specific benefits would your proposed package offer?

Michael Poole

Reply to: