On Tue 2016-08-30 03:02:14 -0400, Matt Taggart wrote:
> Ah I thought I remembered seeing it too but it wasn't in git. But I just
> checked and the git repo I was pointed at was git://finestructure.net/debirf
> which only has up to 0.35. That's the first one listed on the webpage...
>
> git://lair
Daniel Kahn Gillmor writes:
> On Mon 2016-08-29 19:21:49 -0400, Matt Taggart wrote:
> > diskscan would be another good package for the rescue image. It's better
> > testing tool than badblocks (but I'd still keep badblocks in the image).
>
> I'm pretty sure diskscan is already in the rescue image
On Mon 2016-08-29 19:21:49 -0400, Matt Taggart wrote:
> diskscan would be another good package for the rescue image. It's better
> testing tool than badblocks (but I'd still keep badblocks in the image).
I'm pretty sure diskscan is already in the rescue image in 0.36:
0 dkg@alice:~/src/debirf/de
diskscan would be another good package for the rescue image. It's better
testing tool than badblocks (but I'd still keep badblocks in the image).
--
Matt Taggart
tagg...@debian.org
Package: debirf
Version: 0.36
Severity: wishlist
The bug #721190 contains a lot of suggested improvements, but all mixed
together in a confusing way.
Part of it was suggestions for additional packages for the rescue profile:
Andreas Mohr writes...
> Possibly good rescue packages, smallish:
> s
5 matches
Mail list logo
