Regarding: Bug 430023: please add gnu-fdisk-udeb and gnu-cfdisk-udeb

[stappers@stappers.nl (Geert Stappers)]

> 
> OK, so basically the only reason is that the regular fdisk and cfdisk do 
> not support GPT partition tables?
> 
> In that case, I think we should _not_ add these udebs, for the following 
> reasons:
> - we already have parted-udeb, which I expect _does_ support GPT
> - the new udebs conflict with the fdisk/cfdisk udebs, but udpkg does not
>   support Conflicts: (design decision)
> - the gnu-cfdisk udeb depends on ncurses, which is not acceptable
> 
> Conclusion is that there is no real benefit in having these udebs, and a 
> quite a few issues/disadvantages with/of having them.
> 
> I'd appreciate if you'd request the removal of the udebs yourself.


I don't understand it.

The only "risk" I see, is the udeb Package file be coming fat.
D-I won't fetch udebs it doesn't need,
so no harm, no conflicts, no problems.

I even think it is a good thing there is choice in the udeb section.
High on my wishlist is an $EDITOR udeb [1],
which allow/makes possible to do `anna-install $EDITOR`



Where is the danger?
If the answer is "People can do stupid thing unapproved udebs",
then I raise this question:

Could people be allowed to do smart things with udebs they choose?



Cheers
Geert Stappers