Le Sun, Mar 31, 2002 at 11:06:29PM +1000, Anthony Towns �crivait: > Well, I'd much rather let debootstrap see everything, but the folks > who find the mere existance of non-free abhorrent don't like that. And > since I'm heavily prejudiced against special casing more random things, > this probably won't get fixed if it's reassigned back. If we were in > opposite positions, I'd probably reassign it back, though. :)
I don't consider the "local" tree like a random thing when it has been supported by debian-cd for several years. The fact that it can be used to provide updated versions of base packages was never neither documented nor working of course, but I believe it to be useful ... and it doesn't require a costly change. > That's nice. They never used to get them installed during the base install > though -- if they weren't in base.tgz, they weren't anywhere. If you > really want to continue with tradition in that sense, you should make sure > all the base stuff is in main, even if there're newer versions in local. That's a stupid requirement, it's so easy to put it in a local tree and it's so difficult to update it in the main tree. Please reconsider adding local as an accepted source for packages (even base packages). Using local/main instead local is just silly and requires unnecessary changes in debian-cd. Cheers, -- Rapha�l Hertzog -+- http://strasbourg.linuxfr.org/~raphael/ Formation Linux et logiciel libre : http://www.logidee.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
