On Thu, 2007-09-27 at 21:14 +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote: > On Wednesday 26 September 2007 17:36, Ian Kent wrote: > > On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 17:00 +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote: > > > On Wednesday 26 September 2007 16:34, Ian Kent wrote: > > > > > > > > Denys, > > > > > > > > On another note. > > > > 5.0.0_beta1? > > > > > > It's the latest thing I found at > > > > > > http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/daemons/autofs/v4/ > > > > > > Aha. I see. I had to fetch stuff from > > > > > > http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/daemons/autofs/v5/ > > > > > > right? > > > > Yep, that's the place. > > Ian > > autofs-5.0.2 still references www.kernel.org/pub/linux/daemons/autofs/v4/: > > # grep -r /v4 . > ./INSTALL: from http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/daemons/autofs/v4. > ./autofs.spec:Source: > ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/daemons/autofs/v4/autofs-%{version}.tar.gz > ./gentoo/net-fs/autofs/autofs-5.0.2.ebuild:SRC_URI_BASE="mirror://kernel/linux/daemons/${PN}/v4"
Ha, missed that completely. Thnks. > > What do you think about removing autofs-5.0.0_beta1.tar.* from .../v4 > directory > in order to prevent confusion? Yes, I'd like to but I was a bit concerned that distros that pull these tarballs might expect them to be present. Maybe I could encourage an update if I did, which would be desirable. Ian _______________________________________________ autofs mailing list autofs@linux.kernel.org http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/autofs
