* Daniele Palumbo: > On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 12:08:42 -0600 LaMont Jones <lam...@debian.org> wrote: >> tags 516934 + wontfix >> severity 516934 wishlist >> -- >> >> I'm going to go with the memory footprint as being significant enough to >> say that it won't be built that way, since it increases the rdataslab >> size. > > Hi, > > i can agree that memory footprint may be a pain. > what about delivering two version of the package, > as it is for vim-tiny and vim-nox?
This interferes with testing. BIND testing for security updates is already at best sketchy, and having another, different binary to test would not help matters.
