Re: Should ucf be of priority required?

To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Should ucf be of priority required?
From: Patrick Schoenfeld <schoenfeld@debian.org>
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2009 09:25:54 +0100
Message-id: <[🔎] 20091207082553.GB29429@lisa>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20091207080808.GJ24745@rivendell>
References: <[🔎] 20091205154716.GD5693@lisa> <[🔎] 20091205165601.GA3754@crustytoothpaste.ath.cx> <[🔎] 20091205171719.GA10347@lisa> <[🔎] 20091205203928.GB19376@dario.dodds.net> <[🔎] 20091205204844.GL4243@nighthawk.chemicalconnection.dyndns.org> <[🔎] 20091207033618.GA6275@dario.dodds.net> <[🔎] 20091207080808.GJ24745@rivendell>

On Mon, Dec 07, 2009 at 09:08:08AM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> So one day ucf might be deprecated by dpkg itself.

That day will be a good day. Thanks for the news.

Regards,
Patrick

Reply to:

References:
- Should ucf be of priority required?
  - From: Patrick Schoenfeld <schoenfeld@debian.org>
- Re: Should ucf be of priority required?
  - From: "brian m. carlson" <sandals@crustytoothpaste.ath.cx>
- Re: Should ucf be of priority required?
  - From: Patrick Schoenfeld <schoenfeld@debian.org>
- Re: Should ucf be of priority required?
  - From: Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org>
- Re: Should ucf be of priority required?
  - From: Michael Banck <mbanck@debian.org>
- Re: Should ucf be of priority required?
  - From: Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org>
- Re: Should ucf be of priority required?
  - From: Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org>

Prev by Date: Re: Should ucf be of priority required?
Next by Date: Re: DEP-5: removed files
Previous by thread: Re: Should ucf be of priority required?
Next by thread: Re: Should ucf be of priority required?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread