> > (*) wha? no kernel patch is required. The default > > Not really true.
After reading Herbert's mail, I understand what you were trying to do now with the patch. Thanks for explaining the baseconfig / postinst issues. What a mess. -neil
> > (*) wha? no kernel patch is required. The default > > Not really true.
After reading Herbert's mail, I understand what you were trying to do now with the patch. Thanks for explaining the baseconfig / postinst issues. What a mess. -neil