Re: debian-installer package payload format

2003-10-21 Thread Joey Hess
James Troup wrote: > If my vote counts for anything, please do the second not the first. I'd say it counts for about 99% unless we hear from another ftpmaster with a differing opinion. -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: debian-installer package payload format

2003-10-21 Thread James Troup
Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 1. Just include all the boot images in a .deb, as Allastair's original >build/debian does, and assume the ftp-masters will somehow deal with >unpacking that, and that it will not produce problems/confusion to >have this useless .deb in the Packag

Re: debian-installer package payload format

2003-10-21 Thread Joey Hess
Geert Stappers wrote: > When using 'main/debian-installer' instead of 'main' as the place > for the Packages file, the "useless .deb" go only in > dists/${RELEASE}/main/debian-installer/binary-arch/Packages > and not in the regular > dists/${RELEASE}/main/binary-arch/Packages list. Great, then

Re: debian-installer package payload format

2003-10-21 Thread Geert Stappers
On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 at 07:27:56PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > Assuming that we do get an autobuildable debian-installer source package > into the archive that can generate install images, we still seem to have > no plan for what form of binaries it would produce, aside from the > requisite .deb or .

debian-installer package payload format

2003-10-20 Thread Joey Hess
Assuming that we do get an autobuildable debian-installer source package into the archive that can generate install images, we still seem to have no plan for what form of binaries it would produce, aside from the requisite .deb or .udeb. Since we have not had much feedback from the ftp masters on t