Hello Kenneth,
what i meant by this is that the busybox will be updated.
I created a newer busybox "for own use".
Tomorrow, i mailed charles about what i did with a question about
his opinion on what to include as busyboxlinks and so on.
And asked him how the people who wanted to update the package
(task 28011) can get in touch.
I wanted to mail the other 4 assigned too, but at that moment the
database at sf was down, so I didn't know who was assigned.
Because I agree with you that packages like root.lrp shouldn't
circulate, i didn't put it in a "downloadable" place.
>
> Charles:
> Just as a question (and I may have missed a email about this) but do you
> plan on updating the Eigerstein base to the newer busybox/utils?
> Ive avoided doing anything of this nature myself because its my opinion that
> we are creating a mess with the disk images.
>
> LEAF dev:
> Basically i feel until a combined branch of LEAF can be made (which said
> project may have already be dropped) that basically three branches of LRP
> exist.....
> Eigerstein Varient - Firewall
> Oxygen Varient - Util/App system
> LRP 2.9.8 - Router
>
> each of these branches deal extensivly in one direction (except LRP 2.9.8
> which is generalized unless im mistaken)
>
> If a Disk Image is based off a branch (example my own PPPoE image based on
> Eigerstein2BETA) is should NOT contain extensive modifications in comparison
> to the original branch unless thouraly documented or a start to a new branch
It is not my purpose to create a new branch, but I think an update
off the "whole" image is necessary. A few functions are not
functioning as they should.
> Example..
> My PPPoE image is NOTHING more than eigerstein2BETA with upgraded with newer
> packages that the default eigerstein image doesnt include (example is
> dnscache, weblet, dhcpd) and config settings changed (which i need to stop
> being a hypacrite and document)
>
> Its my opinion is that disk images should contain the same package versions
> as the main branch image with the obvious difference of extra packages
> (sshd, pppd, pppoe, seti303, etc) and settings in network.conf
>
> The advantage of this is that based on each branch a default package and
> version set
>
> hmmmmmm...though this may go back to the old concept of having a package
> control system...which may be high time that we concentrate on this
>
> ok.....i need to end my rant/bitch
>
> -Kenneth Hadley
>
Eric Wolzak
http://leaf.sourceforge.net/devel/ericw
_______________________________________________
Leaf-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
