also sprach Gabor Gombas <gombasg@sztaki.hu> [2007.05.19.1832 +0200]: > > Come on. `useless debconf proliferation'? The question has medium > > priority. I can also make it an configration option somewhere and use > > that, but it was just a convenient why to get info from a user. > > I'd also say a debconf question is overkill. People who understand what > the option means can edit a config file by hand. They can set their debconf priority. It's not something to avoid, adding debconf questions. Anyway, I propose that update-initramfs just loses the -k switch or provides a new wrapper that packages like cryptsetup and mdadm just call without worrying whether it will update all initrds or just the current one. -- .''`. martin f. krafft <madduck@debian.org> : :' : proud Debian developer, author, administrator, and user `. `'` http://people.debian.org/~madduck - http://debiansystem.info `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature (GPG/PGP)