> > > > Including the source package I could be convinced of. At least then
> > > > people have to think about what they're doing before causing potential
> > > > problems.
> > >
> > > This "think about what they are doing" thing is precisely one of the
> > > reasons the "extra" priority does exist.
> > >
> > > According to this it should be fine to include it as an "extra" package.
> >
> > Perhaps that is a reason for "extra", but it's really pointless. If it
> > can be installed, people will install it regardless of its priority. I'd
> > bet most people don't even think about a package's priority, largely
> > because many don't know what the priorities mean.
>
> In such case (even if the user install everything, including extra
> packages) I think there should be no problem if the package is a
> package containing just the kernel source (because source code, as such,
> is always harmless).
Yup. I don't have any worries about that. My small concern is people
expecting it to be supported because it came with the distribution. As
I've said, I don't have very strong convictions about a source package.
Brian
( [EMAIL PROTECTED] )
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you love something, set it free. If it comes back, it was, and always
will be yours. If it never returns, it was never yours to begin with.
