[Dan Weber] > I think I need to review the steps on how he makes a bootfloppy like > that. Since I want to be able to understand it externally before I > reimplement in the DI-2.6.
I suspect your approach in making d-i handle 2.6 kernels is not the best nor the most efficient way. Duplicating the d-i CVS, and trying to fork the packages, instead of supplying patches to the current d-i CVS, seem like a inefficient approach. I believe you should consider adding hooks and generic solutions to the official d-i instead of trying to replicate what is being done in the official d-i. I told you this on IRC earlier, but just wanted to repeat it here on the mailing list, to make sure you take it into account. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
