On Sat, Feb 28, 2004 at 11:08:59AM +0000, Alastair McKinstry wrote: > Am Aoine, 2004-02-27 ag 06:52, scr�obh Denis Barbier: > > Hi, > > > > is there any reason why base-config depends on console-tools instead > > of "console-tools | console-utilities"? > > Should work, but I'm not sure of the advantage: base-config almost > always just gets run at installation, so console-tools will be chosen.
Because we can then test kbd without having to uninstall base-config. [...] > Ok, A summary of status and plans: > > The reasons console-(tools|data) still exist are: > (1) A number of developers have threatened/promised to restart work > "post sarge". (*) > (2) Until recently at least, kbd was unmaintained within debian, and had > less integration: console-tools, etc using debconf. Console-data uses debconf, not console-tools. Kbd and console-tools seem to be alternative for the same programs, at least in Debian. > Recently, Wartan has packaged more recent versions o kbd; I'd need to > investigate its debianisation to check if (3) is still true. What is (3)? > I have been reluctant to get involved in the kbd package as I feel a > degree of redundancy on such an essential package is useful. Huh? Redundancy is duplication of work, nothing more. Denis -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
