On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 07:45:25PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > Which was a missing .udeb indeed, and quite bothersome. Not sure if it was > introduced by a change in the hfsplus module, or by a change in d-i. That > said, this is orthogonal to the issues discussed here. Also notice that if we > had one-module-per-udeb and automated dependency handling, this would not have > happened at all, so the argument cuts both way.
Any idea how one would handle loading a module x that depends on module y being loaded first? How is that currently handled? Are the required modules always included in the same udeb as the modules that depend on it? Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
