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

Re: Changes on the stable CD since r0



Hi,

On Sunday 25 November 2007 12:59, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> There is a slight difference between etch-test and etch at the moment.
> Etch-test includes several kernel module source packages to support
> some wireless ethernet cards.  Not sure if we want to include them on
> the CDs or not.  They use approximately 14 MiB on the CD and DVD, and
> wil push more packages out of the CDs.

I'd say lets include them, as it will enable users with this hardware to 
install over the network, which is what the CDs are about. The then missing 
packages just mean more packages to fetch over the network, but it shouldnt 
matter whether you have to fetch 200mb or 214mb.

> This is the updated list of changes on the DVD, excluding the kernel
> module udebs which only was noise on the list.
>
> Removed:
>
>   alien apache apache-common dbconfig-common debhelper dhcp gocr

dhcp removed?

>   html2text lib32z1 libbeecrypt6 libm17n-0 libotf0 librpm4
>   linux-headers-2.6.18-4 linux-headers-2.6.18-4-486
>   linux-headers-2.6.18-4-686 linux-headers-2.6.18-4-amd64
>   linux-image-2.6.18-4-486 linux-image-2.6.18-4-686
>   linux-image-2.6.18-4-amd64 linux-image-2.6.18-4-powerpc
>   linux-image-2.6.18-4-powerpc64 linux-image-2.6.18-4-powerpc-smp
>   lsb-core m17n-db memtester mgp nagios-common nagios-text

lsb-core, memtester, nagios-common removed?

>   ntp-refclock ntp-simple pax quiteinsane rpm sysutils ted ted-common

not sure if removing ntp-simple is so good.

>   texlive-base texlive-base-bin texlive-doc-base texlive-latex-base
>   texlive-pdfetex tofrodos xsane xsane-common


lsb-core, memtester, nagios-common removed look most strange to me, ah, 
nagios2-common is what we use. So only lsb-core and memtester.. or?

The problem with removed packages on the DVD is, that no packages are 
installed from the network, when doing a install from it...


regards,
	Holger

Attachment: pgpS02WtiTInm.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: