Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2010 20:52:15 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: [alpine-devel] Unattended Installation Ideas for 2.1
From: "Matt Smith" <mcs@darkregion.net>
To: alpine-devel@lists.alpinelinux.org
Precedence: list
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Importance: Normal
Message-ID: <1283392335.832431682@192.168.2.228>

On Thursday, August 26, 2010 8:16am, "Natanael Copa" <natanael.copa@gmail.c=
om> said:=0A> On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 9:16 AM, Matt Smith <mcs@darkregion.n=
et> wrote:=0A>> Yeah, the lua-pty option sounds pretty light-weight, as doe=
s "empty."=0A>>=0A>> I'm open to using either option, but I'm thinking "emp=
ty" might be a better fit?=0A> =0A> I'm ok with both. Depends on if you wan=
t do it with shell scripts or lua.=0A=0AHonestly though, I would think most=
 people would come more to knowing how to write a shell script than one in =
lua. =C2=A0Add to that, empty would be more shell-friendly.=0A=0AHowever, w=
hat if both options were available to the user, and then they could:=0A- Us=
e Lua + lua-pty exclusively.=0A- Use shell scripts + empty exclusively.=0A-=
 Or mix and match.=0A=0A- Matt Smith=0A



---
Unsubscribe:  alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org
Help:         alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org
---