On Mon, Jan 10, 2005 at 11:32:45AM -0500, William Ballard wrote: > On Mon, Jan 10, 2005 at 05:21:53PM +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote: > > identify problems, both in upstream and packaged versions. Posting in > > d-d is at least inappropriate. > It's an open list. And streets are public, but you urinating in them is still inappropriate. > The problem is the upstream has the goal of producing a package that > works and another guy is trying to produce a package which requires > module-assistant and "looks like" other packages. Ah, you've nailed it here. Of course, the Debian maintainer had no intention of making a package that worked, it was all about making a showpiece... you've torn back the curtain of *this* little conspiracy. Oh, but wait, the version of ndiswrapper-source in testing is packaged by the same maintainer, and it works just fine for me. > Listen, I'm just going to say this and not reply to all the bazillion > other flames which are coming: > The upstream is better. It's already Debianized. Do not use the one in > the Debian archive. This is off-topic for this list. If you want to propagandize .deb packages that come from non-Debian sources, try doing it somewhere that your opinion is actually respected. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature