Hi, On Sat, Feb 10, 2007 at 04:04:25AM -0500, Asheesh Laroia wrote: > X-Debbugs-CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Thanks Fabian for the bug report. I intend to apply this patch unless > either of the two CC:d maintainers of nano object. > Also, I'm curious - what would you maintainers of nano think if I renamed > the alpine-pico binary package to just "pico"? That's really what the > package is called, and the fact that it's part of the alpine source > package is irrelevant to the user. I personally don't find the suggested use of a dpkg diversion here very satisfying. I wonder if it would be better to make /usr/bin/pico an alternative. Hmm, I see in the bug log that Jordi has already suggested this without cc:ing me, ok. :) -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
