reopen 326742 thanks On Fri, Dec 30, 2005 at 12:00:30PM +1100, Andrew Pilley wrote: > > You are wrong, just wrong. module-assistant is more than a simple GUI, > > please read at least its package description. > > With all due respect, in what way am I "Wrong"? > Regardless of how functional module-assistant is, kernel-package can do > the job to the extent that I require, and does so. > Thus, I don't see why I'm forced to add module-assistant to my system > when I'm not going to use it. > The entirety of my kernel build system is done using kernel-package. It > still works, and so far as I can see, has not been orphaned. Because > module-assistant has similar functionality is not an adequate reason to > deny my request. > If there's been some official debian mandate that requires the switch to > module-assistant, can you please direct me to somewhere I can read it? > > I know you're the maintainer/author of module-assistant, but please > consider not using Debian as a platform for pushing your own software on > other people.
I'll add kernel-package as a alternative dependency in next upload of fuse. Is that ok? regards fEnIo -- ,''`. Bartosz Fenski | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | pgp:0x13fefc40 | irc:fEnIo : :' : 32-050 Skawina - Glowackiego 3/15 - w. malopolskie - Poland `. `' phone:+48602383548 | proud Debian maintainer and user `- http://skawina.eu.org | jid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | rlu:172001
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
