Dear Steve, keeping that story short. I'm in the middle of a big initramfs-tools backlog, the last message to that bug was Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2008 12:36:48 +0200
and was unresponded see: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=454665#32 your email also doesn't enlightem me if busybox-static usage in initramfs does still spam the user with log messages of the type: "Using fallback suid method" > Depends: klibc-utils (>= 1.5.9-1), busybox (>= 1:1.01-3) | busybox-static > (>= 1:1.01-3), cpio, module-init-tools, udev (>= 0.086-1), findutils (>= > 4.2.24) > > (Note that the busybox-initramfs package is not available.) it is available in ubuntu, what about aboves conern? > I'm also disappointed that this simple change has not been made after > two years. Frankly, I'm completely at a loss to understand why no one > has just gone ahead and done this - maybe you could enlighten me..? > > As one of the maintainers of the package, is there some reason you > couldn't just go ahead and make the change? how comes that the change that seems so important to you is not worth a followup? or a proper fix in busybox if it is still the case? (it might or might not be) thank you -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100324041040.gd22...@baikonur.stro.at
