Re: dependencies on makedev

On Thu, 29 Dec 2005, Marco d'Itri wrote: > On Dec 29, Adam Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > To prepare for the eventual removal of makedev, I propose that packages > > Er, why is makedev being removed? Please clue me in. > "Eventual" is the key word here. > Because /eventually/ it will no

Re: dependencies on makedev

On Dec 29, Adam Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > To prepare for the eventual removal of makedev, I propose that packages > Er, why is makedev being removed? Please clue me in. "Eventual" is the key word here. Because /eventually/ it will not be needed anymore (at least by most users, which th

Re: dependencies on makedev

On Thu, 29 Dec 2005, Marco d'Itri wrote: > To prepare for the eventual removal of makedev, I propose that packages > currently depending on it will add an alternative dependency to udev. > Also, policy should be amended accordingly. Er, why is makedev being removed? Please clue me in. -- To U

Re: dependencies on makedev

On Thu, 29 Dec 2005, Marco d'Itri wrote: > These packages have already been fixed: > rng-tools Huh? rng-tools certainly takes benefit of MAKEDEV. It doesn't bork if MAKEDEV has disappeared, though. Is that what you mean? rng-tools postinst does this: (cd /dev && ./MAKEDEV hwrandom || ./MAKEDEV

Re: dependencies on makedev

On Thu, Dec 29, 2005 at 01:39:01PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote: > To prepare for the eventual removal of makedev, I propose that packages > currently depending on it will add an alternative dependency to udev. > Also, policy should be amended accordingly. It might be useful to tell the maintainers

dependencies on makedev

To prepare for the eventual removal of makedev, I propose that packages currently depending on it will add an alternative dependency to udev. Also, policy should be amended accordingly. The affected packages are: alevt camstream cdrecord dvb-utils fbset gnupg gnupg2 irda-utils isdnutils-base joys