On 03/07/2012 10:06 PM, Cody A.W. Somerville wrote:
>> IMO this bug should be closed as invalid.
> Agreed.
would you mind doing it then? ;)
--
Address:Daniel Baumann, Donnerbuehlweg 3, CH-3012 Bern
Email: daniel.baum...@progress-technologies.net
Internet: http://people.pro
Hi Colin,
On 12-03-02 03:38 PM, Colin Watson wrote:
On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 12:50:36AM -0500, Cody A.W. Somerville wrote:
I was curious why it is necessary to use dpkg-divert to temporarily
disable /usr/sbin/flash-kernel per your patch accepted to live-build
upstream but not start-stop-daemon w
On 03/02/2012 09:38 PM, Colin Watson wrote:
> I'm not sure whether it's possible for dpkg to be upgraded in the
> context of a live-build run.
it is in the case where we build a derivative with the debian+ model, so
i'm going to adapt it later on in git to use dpkg-divert.
--
Address:Dan
On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 12:50:36AM -0500, Cody A.W. Somerville wrote:
> I was curious why it is necessary to use dpkg-divert to temporarily
> disable /usr/sbin/flash-kernel per your patch accepted to live-build
> upstream but not start-stop-daemon which is instead just moved aside
> with mv a few l
Hi Colin,
I was curious why it is necessary to use dpkg-divert to temporarily
disable /usr/sbin/flash-kernel per your patch accepted to live-build
upstream but not start-stop-daemon which is instead just moved aside
with mv a few lines above. Is it to properly handle the case where the
file i
