On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 02:35:46PM +0100, Francesco Paolo Lovergine wrote: > On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 01:28:03PM +0100, Bas Zoetekouw wrote: > > If it doesn't work and you can't fix it and upstream won't, then the > > package should be removed altogether. > > Bah, devfs is not mandatory. There are situation where xxgdb could > anyway be useful as is.
While this might had been true three years ago, it isn't anymore, due to udev. I can just agree with Bas here - either this gets fixed, because on a current system it isn't useful at all if you don't grow your own kernels and ignore quite a lot of other stuff. > I'll see if I could build up a suitable patch for that. Would be nice if you had done any efforts on that front... Just tagging the bugreport upstream and doing nothing on it won't help the bug go away, I'm sorry. :/ So long, Rhonda -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
