On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 12:43:39PM -0600, Micah Anderson wrote: > Yes, you are right -- we are in the process of transitioning lkcdutils > into its subcomponants. We welcome suggestions of where we could point > this out better so people will see it.
Well, especially in the case of dumputils, it would be well placed in the package description. Something like "this package will replace lkcdutils in the future, so if unsure, choose this one". However, it will automagically become more clear ... > A new version of kernel-patch-lkcd has been uploaded that Recommends: > dumputils | lkcdutils, once we finish the transition, lkcdutils will ... if this new version will be out there in the wild :) > Again, you are right.... however you are right only because we are in > the middle of this transition. We separated out lcrash and it is in > the NEW queue waiting to be accepted into the archive. Additionally, Very well, thanks for this info :) > crash is a separate package. The tutorial and READMEs that are > distributed with lkcdutils are horribly out of date and very wrong in > many ways. New documentation needs to be written, and when it is we > will package that. Hmmm, unfortunately, there is not much documentation about lkcd around. Therefore, I personally prefer having some outdated documents than having none at all. For example, the lkcd tutorial gives a good overview about the general concepts of lkcd. Another example: When I installed dumputils, I went through dumputils.conf and found a statement regarding DUMP_FLAGS: `DUMP_FLAGS_NONDISRUPT is not recommended'. I knew the concept of disruptive and non disruptive dumps from the lkcd tutorial and I currently don't know any other place where to find any information about it - except the kernel source :) The recommendation in the config file is without any explanation etc., so it is hard for anyone to interpret and weight it. Especially it is hard to decide, if enabling non-disruptive dumps is dangerous, for example. In the lkcd tutorial I found that panic dumps are always disruptive, so the tutorial gave me a chance to weight, even if it might be outdated and even if there are no dumps on OOPSes (anymore? - and I don't think there are). However I would not like to get my systems rebooted just because of an OOPS (without a following panic) resulting in a dump, so I decided to enable non-disruptive dumps. Because of these things I personally would suggest to keep the documentation even if it is outdated, as long as there is nothing better. Perhaps move it to an old/ or outdated/ subdirectory and notice it in the README.Debian. > Yup, thats what we are doing :) Sorry for the bug report then :) Thanks for your work & regards Mario -- I heard, if you play a NT-CD backwards, you get satanic messages... That's nothing. If you play it forwards, it installs NT. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
