Re: Debian 2.0 install
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ualberta.ca> writes:
> > cdrom Install from a CD-ROM.
> > nfs Install from an NFS server (not yet mounted).
> > harddisk Install from a hard disk partition (not yet mounted).
> > mounted Install from a filesystem which is already mounted.
> > ftp Install using ftp.
> > http Install using http:, ftp:, and file: URLs.
>
> Last I heard these ones where really quite bad and had problems with
> pre-depends and others. Other than the 'not yet mounted' stuff apt largely
> replaces all of them -- there are some features a very small number of
> people need that only those methods provide but that is fairly rare.
Yes, well, you would say that, wouldn't you? Let's not get carried
away with `apt' fervour, please. If there are known bugs or
obsolescence with these methods fine, but purging them on the basis
that the apt author ``has heard'' that they are bad and have problems
and that features which they provide are (in the apt authors opinion)
``rarely needed'' strikes me as a stunningly bad idea.
Remove them from the default choice list, if the problem is user
confusion, by all means, but they should be available.
--
James
"Never trust trucks"
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-testing-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: