David Cantrell wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 13:30:05 -0500
Chris Lumens <clumens@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Calculations based on RHEL 5 were around 2MB.
I don't expect to be much different.
We can get rid of GConf2 stuff and the XML settings if we patch Dogtail to
not check gconf key for accessibility. This is a simple patch that will
cause one of the Dogtail functions to return always true.
That was discussed long time ago (can't find the link) but there was no
decision.
Yeah it'd probably be nice to get rid of the gconf stuff if possible.
Perhaps we can go ahead and include these patches, and you can work on
getting the simple patch included upstream.
I'm also confused here. Which patch gets included where?
What does everyone else think?
I'm confused. Is this patching dogtail to make a special version to include in stage2 or just patching dogtail to not require gconf stuff? I am in favor of adding dogtail support, but I don't think we should make a special version included for anaconda.
Yes, that's patching Dogtail to not check the gconf settings.
_______________________________________________
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list
Anaconda-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
