Daniel Baumann wrote:
Michael Tokarev wrote:
I understand that
CD-ROMs sometimes contains boot-floppy images which gets created
with mtools, and that USB sticks can be formatted with dosfstools,
syslinux needs both mtools and dosfstools.
Hmm. But initially both were Recommends, maybe you can provide
at least a changelog entry explaining the change?
I just tried to make a msdos-formatted floppy bootable using syslinux,
with neither dosfstools nor mtools installed. It just worked. Granted,
I only used one executable but syslinux package contains other tools
and scripts.
> putting extlinux into an own
binary package seems to be micropackaging (which only would make sense
if, which im not yet certain of it if i'll really do it, blow up
extlinux support tools (update-extlinux similar as update-grub) to be
used as a generic boot loader replacing grub).
Now it's difficult to parse that. Yes, perhaps, extlinux in a separate
package is overkill. But speaking of using it as a general bootloader -
syslinux actually is a very good bootloader. And this is exactly what
I'm trying to do - to use it as a general-purpose bootloader replacing
lilo and grub on several 100s of machines here (some are using lilo and
some grub now). Not sure if it somehow "related" to Debian.
But now when you mentioned it... I'm unsure. I'll be rebuilding
the package here anyway (since it looks like you refuse to lessen
the dependencies), maybe it's better to split extlinux into its
own pkg, to do it all "right". Again, lacking the changelog entry
it's difficult to say why the two packages are that important.
but neither are requiriment for, say, pxelinux or extlinux.
for pxelinux, you don't need the syslinux package, but syslinux-common only.
Aha. Makes sense. Thanks for the info.
/mjt
P.S. Dunno if sending to 532857@ makes any sense after you sent
to 532857-d...@. Let's see...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
