On Wed, Nov 16, 2005 at 12:35:03AM +0100, Erik van Konijnenburg wrote: > > I think the best would be for Erik to comment on this, CCing this to him > > now. > > To summarise: we can reduce dependencies and make the footprint smaller, > but at a cost in building effort and the stability that comes with > mature packages. A consequence is that it would take longer to build > new features such as swsusp. It's a tradeoff; I would appreciate input > on which aspect is most important for etch.
Thanks for your reply. I am not sure, but i feel that the rewriting or whatever to use only perl-base would be needed only once we are sure it is going to be part of base or not. This is a choice, and i have the feeling that the 2.4 upgrade path makes initramfs-tools more suitable as default, altough i believe choice is good. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
