Re: RFC: ITP(?) busybox and mklibs.sh as seperate packages

I [zhaoway] wrote: Please give me your advice if packaging busybox and mklibs.sh as seperate packages is a good idea or not. Thanks! This comes to my mind because: [snip] 2) Packages like mkinitrd-cd depends on boot-floppies solely for these two utilities. Erik wrote: The main BusyBox

Re: RFC: ITP(?) busybox and mklibs.sh as seperate packages

On Wed Oct 11, 2000 at 08:13:37AM +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Please give me your advice if packaging busybox and mklibs.sh as seperate packages is a good idea or not. Thanks! This comes to my mind because: 1) Seems boot-floppies won't like to come into woody (c.f. Adam) 2)