>I haven't used progeny yet, but I thought they do rename some packages. Could
Some packages, but not this one... see below. >this be an issue ? Some people have tried the debs on debian-beowulf, and they >work fine. The dependency on libc6 2.3.1 is a bit too harsh, and I believe >it would work with older libcs too. Progeny: ii libc6 2.2.1-1 GNU C Library: Shared libraries and Timezone ii libc6-dev 2.2.1-1 GNU C Library: Development Libraries and Hea [snip] >I could do that, but it doesn't sound like too good an idea. The mosix >packages are Priority: extra anyways. Mosix is going to be used by *very* >few people, and getting core packages to recognise the changes it makes >doesn't sound like an idea that will be acceptable to most people. The other alternative is to provide MOSIX-specific replacements for core packages, and that sounds even worse. (IMHO) I maintain that the problem lies within the way config files are handled in the first place. I ask you: Could you forward the original e-mail with config file generation idea included to this list? (I've lost my own copy) Thanx in advance, Christian Lavoie [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 0
