Le Thu, Jan 15, 2004 at 03:00:51PM -0500, Jeff Licquia �crivait: > >Unfortunately nobody contacted me yet to tell me he's interested in helping > >out. :) > > I'd be interested, except that I'm of the opinion that debian-cd's > design is flawed at a basic level, which was one of the motivations > behind picax.
Can you be more explicit ? I'd like to know what is flawed exactly in your opinion. I'm still looking for hints from users so that I can make something better if I decide to work on the (partial) rewrite of debian-cd. > >But it doesn't take into account dependencies. That's an important > >feature of debian-cd in my opinion. > > Picax does take dependencies into account. A raw order list is You may want to update the comment in the picax file to make that more explicit then : # This script splits a repository into N parts, each approximately the # same size, such that adding each part to an apt sources.list is the # same as adding the original whole. Options exist for adding an apt # CD label, for specifying the architecture, and for providing a # package order list. (On the latter, no dependency resolution is # done, so the list should be vetted for proper dependency # resolution.) > Great. And if that's what everyone wants, more power to you. But it > sounded like there was a dearth of people wanting to work on the current > version, so an alternative might be welcome. Alternatives are always welcome, except that picax is not yet a complete replacement for debian-cd. Making bootable CDs on all arches is tricky. You don't support debian-installer yet. And there's probably other features lacking but I haven't studied picax enough to be able to make a list. Cheers, -- Rapha�l Hertzog -+- http://www.ouaza.com Formation Linux et logiciel libre : http://www.logidee.com Earn money with free software: http://www.geniustrader.org
