Jeremy Katz wrote:
On Fri, 2008-02-01 at 16:27 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Feb 01, 2008 at 03:17:55PM -0600, Douglas McClendon wrote:
With those lists in hand, we could work on rationalizing @core and
@base (because they're not really well-defined) and perhaps collapse
them into one group.
yes please. Rationalizing and well-defining @core and @base sounds
great to me :) I mean, if there is a rational reason why selinux policy
should be explicitly listed in those, then fine, but I haven't heard the
reason yet, just the fact.
I think a rational split is:
You have the right idea, but Base and Core backwards. And really,
and right there is part of the problem.
The absolute minimum maintainable set should be "minimum."
It needs a text editor, and the one history tells us should be there is
vi (not that johnny-come-lately nano that some install).
I don't care whether the practical minimum is "base" or "core," and I
think I'm not alone in being unable to see the difference between the terms.
--
Cheers
John
-- spambait
1aaaaaaa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Z1aaaaaaa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
-- Advice
http://webfoot.com/advice/email.top.php
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375
You cannot reply off-list:-)
_______________________________________________
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list
Anaconda-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
