* Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-03-02 15:03]:
> * smaller
> * should generally be faster
> * maintaining two debconf implementations is hard work
> * consistent UI between installer and installed system
> That's what I can think of at the moment, anyway.
Thanks, that list was exac
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 11:59:02AM +, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-03-02 05:08]:
> > Joey has been campaigning [1] for a while to get everything in the
> > archive changed to depend on debconf | debconf-2.0 or similar rather
> > than just debconf, in order
Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-03-02 05:08]:
>> Joey has been campaigning [1] for a while to get everything in the
>> archive changed to depend on debconf | debconf-2.0 or similar rather
>> than just debconf, in order that we can start rolli
* Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-03-02 05:08]:
> Joey has been campaigning [1] for a while to get everything in the
> archive changed to depend on debconf | debconf-2.0 or similar rather
> than just debconf, in order that we can start rolling out cdebconf
> as its replacement.
It would be
Joey has been campaigning [1] for a while to get everything in the
archive changed to depend on debconf | debconf-2.0 or similar rather
than just debconf, in order that we can start rolling out cdebconf as
its replacement. Like most jobs that involve touching the bulk of the
archive, this looks set
5 matches
Mail list logo
