On Wed, Mar 24, 2004 at 01:34:50AM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> > > So, could you please remove the "install" and "installation"
> > > pseudo-packages, and change the description of the "boot-floppy"
> > > pseudo-package to read something like 'Installation system in Debian 3.0
> > > and earlier re
[removing ftpmaster@; they'll be getting this via the BTS anyway]
On Wed, Mar 24, 2004 at 12:34:11AM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 08:56:47PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> > So, could you please remove the "install" and "installation"
> > pseudo-packages, and change the descri
> > boot-floppy, cdrom, install and installation were all added to accomplish
> > the same thing -- catch more bugs against the installation procedure as they
> > came in, without relying on unknown-package. They are orthogonal to whatever
> > we call the installation system.
I can understand that
On Wed, Mar 24, 2004 at 12:34:11AM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 08:56:47PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> > So, could you please remove the "install" and "installation"
> > pseudo-packages, and change the description of the "boot-floppy"
> > pseudo-package to read something lik
On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 08:56:47PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> So, could you please remove the "install" and "installation"
> pseudo-packages, and change the description of the "boot-floppy"
> pseudo-package to read something like 'Installation system in Debian 3.0
> and earlier releases'? (Actual
On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 04:41:00PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> Frans Pop wrote:
> > . Package tracking system overview of d-i packages
> > . overview of debian-installer bugs
> > -> http://bugs.qa.debian.org/cgi-bin/debian-installer.cgi
> > (includes pseudo-package 'install')
>
> Hmm. Who do I t
Frans Pop wrote:
> . Package tracking system overview of d-i packages
> . overview of debian-installer bugs
> -> http://bugs.qa.debian.org/cgi-bin/debian-installer.cgi
> (includes pseudo-package 'install')
Hmm. Who do I talk to, to get "install" removed from that list?
> . Uncategorised and g
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> There's now a debian-installer package (real, not pseudo, but same
> difference), which addresses part of this bug. With regard to the
> confusion about install/installation, I just had a conversation with
> Joey Hess on IRC.
Note that part of the c
reassign 174410 ftp.debian.org
thanks
There's now a debian-installer package (real, not pseudo, but same
difference), which addresses part of this bug. With regard to the
confusion about install/installation, I just had a conversation with
Joey Hess on IRC:
Kamion: are you around?
joeyh: ye
* Colin Watson
| Which is why I'm suggesting they be segregated - sorry, I wasn't very
| clear above. However, there does need to be a designated place for
| people to file d-i bugs (if they don't know what udeb is at fault, as
| they probably won't for the most part). Zefram reassigned a bunch o
Anthony Towns wrote:
> given the trivial amount of code shared between
>debian-installer and boot-floppies, bugs found in one aren't relevant
>to the other in most cases.
Actually two of the three bugs that I'd reported against the "install"
package turned out to be relevant to
On Fri, Dec 27, 2002 at 03:40:59PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 26, 2002 at 11:14:01PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> > It does seem that a pseudo-package for the debian-installer would be
> > useful; however, I don't see why the existing 'install' etc.
> > pseudo-packages aren't good en
On Thu, Dec 26, 2002 at 11:14:01PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 26, 2002 at 09:32:28PM +, Zefram wrote:
> > Package: bugs.debian.org
> > Today I've been reporting a few bugs in a Debian package. Some of my
> > bug reports have been rejected by a developer for reasons that amount
>
Colin Watson wrote:
>It does seem that a pseudo-package for the debian-installer would be
>useful; however, I don't see why the existing 'install' etc.
>pseudo-packages aren't good enough, if people will stop assuming that
>bugs filed there relate exclusively to boot-floppies.
That's how I thought
On Thu, Dec 26, 2002 at 09:32:28PM +, Zefram wrote:
> Package: bugs.debian.org
>
> Today I've been reporting a few bugs in a Debian package. Some of my
> bug reports have been rejected by a developer for reasons that amount
> to "fixing that bug is too big a change to make in stable". In no
15 matches
Mail list logo
