On Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 03:28:42PM +1100, Glenn McGrath wrote:
> Whats the point in following a policy that just gets in the road.
>
> I really dont understand why our (the installer team) work has to get
> pushed away into some dark hidden corner.
Because the whole point of this argument is tha
Anthony Towns wrote:
> It might, at some point, become useful for there to be some mini-policy
> about these debs, or even for it to just be put in policy proper.
There already is, although it is very spare (dos/modules.txt in
debian-installer cvs). Only certian dpkg features can be used in udebs
Glenn McGrath wrote:
> What if debian install requires a stock standard package thats in main,
> does that package have to be in both archives?
Yes.
> Mabye in the long run some sort of sub-packaging system may be
> apropriate, that way the installer could extract some binaries from
> existing v
Joey Hess wrote:
> I've actually been wondering if it might be possible to put the udebs in
> binary-i386 (but not in the Packages files for any distribution), and
> then just have Packages files in disks-i386 (or whatever). This lets us
> use some features of the package pools for udebs too. Jame
Erik Andersen wrote:
> I'd go for dists/unstable/debian-installer myself. This is really not a part
> of main.
It's a part of main just like boot-floppies is a part of main.
> And since we are requiring completely separate packages (.udebs),
> having a separate archive section makes sense reall
Adam Di Carlo wrote:
> > dists/ stable/ main/
> > binary-i386/
> > various .debs
> > disks-i386/
> > various .udebs
> > some basic boot-floppies
> > release notes
> > source/
> >
On Wed Oct 25, 2000 at 09:26:00PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
> Adam Di Carlo wrote:
> > > dists/ stable/ main/
> > > binary-i386/
> > > various .debs
> > > disks-i386/
> > > various .udebs
> > > some basic boot-floppies
> > >
7 matches
Mail list logo
