Re: Bug#219582: ITP: linux -- Linux 2.4 kernel
On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 03:48:26PM +0000, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 11:40:11PM +1100, Jamie Wilkinson wrote:
> > There are already several forks of the Linux kernel in Debian anyway.
> > Robert wishes to attempt to unify them, does that not grant him use of the
> > name 'linux'?
> No he doesn't. He wants to create a new arbitrary patch set, in a
> context where arbitrary patch sets have always been given distinct
> names, and to call it by the "vanilla" name. It's irresponsible.
You're deliberately confusing the upstream name with the Debian patchset.
> He doesn't even have the slim excuse of being implicitly the Debian
> variant, because there would be two. All this can create is confusion.
As I said before, I'm using the patches in kernel-patch-debian.
"[..] but the delight and pride of Aule is in the deed of making, and in the
thing made, and neither in possession nor in his own mastery; wherefore he
gives and hoards not, and is free from care, passing ever on to some new work."
-- J.R.R.T, Ainulindale (Silmarillion)