On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 03:00:59PM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
> I thought what you wanted was to drop cjwatson-which, either in favour
> of no which in Debian at all, or the option to install GNU or BSD which.
>
> However, you have now suggested that someone could package
> cjwatson-which in anoth
Hello Clint,
On Fri 24 Sep 2021 at 12:52PM GMT, Clint Adams wrote:
> What I want is for GNU which to stop languishing in NEW, for the dozen
> people who keep complaining that FreeBSD which is better and some other
> volunteer should package FreeBSD which to actually spend the 15 minutes
> to do t
On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 09:26:19AM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> Talking about "which", it might be good to get an explanation from the
> maintainer what he wants, and why, and then discuss based on that.
What I want is for GNU which to stop languishing in NEW, for the dozen
people who keep complai
On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 10:44:06AM +0200, Ansgar wrote:
> On Fri, 2021-09-24 at 09:26 +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > In my opinion, an amicable middle-ground proposal would be that the
> > debianutils maintainer completely removes "which" from debianutils,
> > and assuming the sysvinit-utils mainta
On Fri, 2021-09-24 at 09:26 +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> In my opinion, an amicable middle-ground proposal would be that the
> debianutils maintainer completely removes "which" from debianutils,
> and assuming the sysvinit-utils maintainers agree, that they adopt
> both the existing "which" and (at
On Fri, 24 Sep 2021, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> and assuming the sysvinit-utils maintainers agree, that they adopt
> both the existing "which" and (at least temporarily) "tempfile".
Independent of which “which” is to be adopted, I ask for this “which”
to be one that *does* support “which -a”, which is
6 matches
Mail list logo
