Bug#66535: s/linux-kernel-log-daemon/kernel-log-daemon/g
Hello
Manoj Srivastava schrieb:
> >>"Arthur" == Arthur Korn <arthur@korn.ch> writes:
>
> Arthur> Some HURD developer assured me that the hurd will have linux compatible
> Arthur> kernel logging.
>
> Could we have more details, please?
# Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2000 22:37:48 +0200
# From: Marcus Brinkmann <Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de>
# To: Arthur Korn <arthur@korn.ch>
# Cc: debian-policy@lists.debian.org
# Subject: Re: [Re: Bug#66535: proposal of virtual package: syslogd]
# Message-ID: <20000703223747.A26609@ulysses.dhis.net>
# In-Reply-To: <20000703212349.A6203@korn.ch>; from arthur@korn.ch
# on Mon, Jul 03, 2000 at 09:23:49PM +0200
#
# On Mon, Jul 03, 2000 at 09:23:49PM +0200, Arthur Korn wrote:
# > I think it would be even better to split up sysklogd into two
# > packages, and then have virtual packages like
# > 'system-log-daemen' and 'linux-kernel-log-daemon' (or would
# > 'kernel-log-daemon' be sufficient? Im thinking on the HURD).
#
# Thanks for paying attention. The Hurd can and will have a
# kernel logger,
# too, so please use the generic name.
#
# Thanks,
# Marcus
I don't know the HURD, Marcus, how far are you HURD ppl with
kernel logging?
> Is this a definite course of action? Is someone working on
> the code? Shall there be a hurd specific logging mechanism?
> (in which case we should not get rid of the linux part). In
> any case, I would rather wait until one is sure that such a
> beast actually exists before changing stuff.
Nobody uses these virtual packages yet, I wasn't even aware that
they were already official, changing them shouldn't be a
problem. I think it will be much more work to change it later,
when these packages are used. (And they _will_ be used, as soon
as I get in touch with Martin Schulze <joey@debian.org> or do
that NMU ...).
ciao, 2ri
--
Der beste Beweis für die Existenz ausserirdischer _Intelligenz_
ist der, dass noch niemand versucht hat, Kontakt mit uns
aufzunehmen.
-- Bill Watterson
Reply to: