Hi,
Marco d'Itri (2024-04-09):
> Yes. Nowadays kmod has many more features related to compressed modules
> and verification of signatures.
> Can we agree that kmod should provide these programs for d-i?
> Or can the d-i maintainers just tell us what they want?
I meant to come back to this after
On Jan 06, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> Yes, some utils in busybox aren't as good as regular implementations. For
Yes. Nowadays kmod has many more features related to compressed modules
and verification of signatures.
Can we agree that kmod should provide these programs for d-i?
Or can the d-i maint
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> found 1060134 28-1
Bug #1060134 [kmod-udeb,busybox-udeb] kmod-udeb vs busybox-udeb: agree on who
ships depmod
There is no source info for the package 'busybox-udeb' at version '28-1' with
architecture ''
Marked as found in versions kmod/28-1.
>
Processing control commands:
> reassign 1068637 debian-installer
Bug #1068637 [debian-installer] apt does not always install Recommends
Bug #931283 [debian-installer] base-installer doesn't install Recommends for
most packages
Bug #1068560 [debian-installer] "Recommends: thin-provisioning-tools"
Control: reassign 1068637 debian-installer
Control: reassign 1068560 debian-installer
Control: forcemerge 931283 1068637 1068560
Summary of bug(s) so far: lvm2 installed by d-i without its Recommends
Question: Can we solve this once and for all or do we need/want a
workaround and/or downgrade for
Processing control commands:
> reassign 1068637 debian-installer
Bug #1068637 [apt] apt does not always install Recommends
Bug reassigned from package 'apt' to 'debian-installer'.
No longer marked as found in versions apt/2.7.14.
Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #1068637 to the same
6 matches
Mail list logo
