On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 08:20:18AM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > Josh Triplett <j...@joshtriplett.org> (2014-01-21): > > In that case, to clarify further: I don't have any objection to > > installing plymouth as long as the "splash" option is *not* included by > > default. It's a minor waste of disk space if unused, but it might be > > worth the convenience of being able to quickly turn on the splash. > > I don't see the point of installing something if it isn't used/useful by > default. “apt-get install plymouth” should be fast enough for anyone who > cares about having it installed.
I don't see the point either, and I wasn't saying I was in *favor* of it either. I just meant that the objections I was stating earlier in the bug didn't apply if the splash screen wasn't actually *used*. :) > See also Julien's point. A completely reasonable point; I'd agree that without a package in unstable there's nothing to be done here. - Josh Triplett -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
