> e2fsprogs (need to build an analogous ufsprogs package - does it need > to provide: e2fsprogs?)
I think it would be best to make a virtual package called something like rootfsprogs. Then your dependencies could look like: xxx depends on rootfsprogs e2fsprogs provides rootfsprogs ufsprogs provides rootfsprogs reiserfsprogs provides rootfsprogs Oh, did I mention reiserfs? This would probably be a good way to ease the transition from ext2 to reiser in the main Debian tree. Is anyone subscribed to debian-devel (which I'm not) willing to propose this? If not, I'll go do it myself... > libstdc++ (NetBSD version) I agree with the remark about GCC-3.0 here... > sysvinit (need to decide what we're doing with this one - use BSD > init and lose ability to switch runlevels, or port/write a System V > style init) I agree that SysV-style init is definitely one of the defining factors for a Debian system, so in the long term I'd really like to see it done. If it's more work than using BSD-init as an interim solution, though, do that first. - Michael ===== "I wanted to change the world. But I have found that the only thing one can be sure of changing is oneself." -- Aldous Huxley __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
