On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 07:50:59AM +1000, Anibal Monsalve Salazar wrote: Hi all, > >I'll do some checks before giving the package away. It is > >_not_ orphaned, I'm "only" looking for somebody else for maintaining. > > aba didn't really orphaned it. > > On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 10:12:38PM +0100, Baruch Even wrote: > >Hi, > > > >On February you've ITA'ed the iproute package and there seems to be no > >update on the packaging status. > > > >Are you still interested in the package? Any problems that we can help > >you with?
I have had problems with a change of ISP and now I am finally back.
I released, time ago, a more recent compilation, that you can find here
[0]. I don't think Andreas has released anything new since this mail yet.
If you are interested we can work together.
I would like to submit to you what I thought after this [0] approach: in
sarge, as well as in woody, you can find 2 official kernels.
The last release (mine one, which is actually unofficial) was made for the
2.6.x kernel, while it can not be used for 2.4.x.
Do you think it can be a good idea to create a "virtual pkg" or a similar
"escamotage" in order to use the same pkg but when you use the 2.4 kernel
you then use (let's say) iproute-2.4 binary, otherwise if you use 2.6 kernel the
other binary (on the same installation and system!) the (let's say)
iproute-2.6 binary.
The idea is similar to the init-mod for the 2.4 and 2.6 kernel.
Let me know what you think and if it is feasible.
Cheers
SteX
[0] /etc/apt/sources.list
deb http://www.stex.name/debian/ ./
deb-src http://www.stex.name/debian/ ./
It is still not a browsable archive :((
--
GPG key = D52DF829 -- SteX -- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Keyserver: http://keyserver.kjsl.com, User#324592, http://counter.li.org
http://www.openlabs.it/~stex -- http://www.stex.name
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
