On Fri, Dec 10, 1999 at 02:06:47AM -0800, Chris Waters wrote: > Furthermore, it occurs to me that the problem isn't just essential > packages. If libc6 fails to work during an upgrade, we're equally bad > off, but libc6 isn't essential. So, the proposal is not only > ambiguous and redundant, but misdirected as well. Only the fact that > it's harmless (because it's redundant) keeps me from formally > objecting. :-)
*sigh* How about coming up with something better then? Sheesh. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG encrypted mail preferred. ``The thing is: trying to be too generic is EVIL. It's stupid, it results in slower code, and it results in more bugs.'' -- Linus Torvalds
pgph3PebmTAVq.pgp
Description: PGP signature
