Re: base dependency warning

1999-12-21 Thread Joey Hess
Joseph Carter wrote: > I don't think the last 3 lines need to remain in policy. Any issues with > removing them? Otherwise this sounds good to me. Removing them changes who is responsible for that. That's worth a seperate proposal, I think it might be too controversial to tack onto this one, whi

Re: base dependency warning

1999-12-21 Thread Joseph Carter
On Mon, Dec 20, 1999 at 04:04:09PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote: > > I don't think the last 3 lines need to remain in policy. Any issues with > > removing them? Otherwise this sounds good to me. > > Removing them changes who is responsible for that. That's worth a seperate > proposal, I think it might

Re: base dependency warning

1999-12-21 Thread Taketoshi Sano
Hi. In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, at Mon, 20 Dec 1999 14:06:59 -0800, on Re: base dependency warning, Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Since Adam tells us this is no longer true and the boot-floppies team > decides what goes in the base system, and since we seem to have a consens

Re: base dependency warning

1999-12-21 Thread Julian Gilbey
> Since Adam tells us this is no longer true and the boot-floppies team > decides what goes in the base system, and since we seem to have a consensus > that the base section is then unnecessary, policy needs to be updated. > > Since other parts of policy refer to "the base system", we still need

Re: base dependency warning

1999-12-21 Thread Adam Di Carlo
>>| 2.3.6. The base system >> -- >>| The base system is a minimum subset of the Debian GNU/Linux >>| system that is installed before everything else on a new system. >>| Thus, only very few packages are allowed to go into the base >>| system to keep the required disk

Re: base dependency warning

1999-12-21 Thread Joey Hess
Adam Di Carlo wrote: > >>You must not place any packages into the `base' section before > >>this has been discussed on the `debian-devel' mailing list and a > >>consensus about doing that has been reached. > > > This last is unclear and wierd. In fact, it is only the boot-floppies >

Re: base dependency warning

1999-12-21 Thread Adam Di Carlo
>It's also current policy. I tacked it on only for reference. I'm not >accepting amendments that change that paragrpah, because I am only changing >a prt of policy to document existing practice, but you're quite welcome to >make your own proposal. I would, but I'm too busy saving the world.

Re: base dependency warning

1999-12-21 Thread Taketoshi Sano
Hi. In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, at Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 06:25:33 -0800, on Subject: Re: base dependency warning, Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > It's also current policy. I tacked it on only for reference. I'm not > accepting amendments that change that paragrpah, because I am only ch