Andreas Jellinghaus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> some people don't use dpkg, don't use debian, and still will burn a cdrom for
> a friend. a tar.gz is much better ...
Or a brief note that says use "ar x blah...deb" to extract the tar.gz file.
--
Raul
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTEC
On Wed, Jun 17, 1998 at 06:55:13PM +0200, Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
> > What's wrong with having both? We already have dpkg*nondebbin.tgz.
>
> both is ok. do you want to create the package ?
I would like to, but currently I'm busy building and testing
boot-floppies_2.0.7. I may be able to try yo
> Please, note that I'm not saying that these scripts should be distributed
> *just* as a .deb package. I'm saying that they should probably be
> distributed as a .deb package *in addition* to any other form of
> distributing them. I don't want to discuss "what is better".
so, feel free to pickup
> What's wrong with having both? We already have dpkg*nondebbin.tgz.
both is ok. do you want to create the package ?
andreas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Jun 16, 1998 at 08:31:15PM +0200, Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
> > Well, but putting them in a hamm package does not prevent people using bo
> > to download that package (it's a "binary-all" package, isn't it?) and use
> > it. Moreover, people can use the bug tracking system to report bugs.
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Tue, 16 Jun 1998, Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
> > Well, but putting them in a hamm package does not prevent people using bo
> > to download that package (it's a "binary-all" package, isn't it?) and use
> > it. Moreover, people can use the bug tracking system t
Regarding the idea of doing the cd construction scripts as a .deb
Andreas Jellinghaus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> no, a package is not a good idea.
Would the .orig.tar.gz for such a package not be exactly what you intend to
produce anyway ?
In which case, you can satisfy both camps by just addi
>> i don't think that a package is the right place for such stuff :
>> many people want to burn debian cd's before or without installing debian
>> hamm.
>
>Well, but putting them in a hamm package does not prevent people using bo
>to download that package (it's a "binary-all" package, isn't it?) a
> Well, but putting them in a hamm package does not prevent people using bo
> to download that package (it's a "binary-all" package, isn't it?) and use
> it. Moreover, people can use the bug tracking system to report bugs.
> I don't think a package is such a wrong place.
some people don't use dpkg
"Andreas" == Andreas Jellinghaus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Andreas> binary, and a request not to sell or burn debian hamm cd's
Andreas> before it it released, a statement that and why we not
Theres a policy that debian hamm CDs can't be burned and sold before
release?
- P
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Tue, 16 Jun 1998, Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
> i don't think that a package is the right place for such stuff :
> many people want to burn debian cd's before or without installing debian hamm.
Well, but putting them in a hamm package does not prevent people
> Mmm, why don't you just ask Bruce to maintain this package and update it
> appropriately?
www.uk.debian.org/~aj/ contains make scripts to do the job for hamm.
i don't like this rude behaviour too, but it's the debian way to remove a
package, and several people complaint to me, that the current
12 matches
Mail list logo
