On Tuesday 13 July 2004 18.31, Christer Solskogen wrote: > > > hugs:~# deborphan -a > > > main/base base-config > > > main/base kernel-image-2.6.7-1-686 > Mostly kernel-image-2.6.7-1-686, and base-config. base-config: see Colin's comments. kernel-image: I guess dpkg *could* have code to check if it's the currently running kernel and refuse to deinstall it if it is. But it would have to deal with >10 different bootloaders (probably >20, I don't know) So this would be very ugly to maintain... I guess you agree that dpkg should allow deinstallation of non-running kernels? Many people prefer to use their self-compiled kernel instead of a Debian packaged one, and many probably just don't know the kernel-package package (and others don't care for it.) Others may boot their Linux system from the 'outside', perhaps using LOADLIN (isn't one of the PowerPC bootloaders similar?) or booting from the network and later changing the root partition, so maybe there really is no kernel on the Linux filesystem. So enforcing a kernel package to be present is not a good idea. And: Unix traditionally gives the admin enough rope to hang himself. I like that attitude, because the alternative is a system where people have to implement lengthy and buggy workarounds because sometimes there is a *reason* to do things differently than most other people. I believe Debian and its packaging system should (and currently does quite well) be traditional here. (And, believe it or not, the .sig of this email was just chosen by my regular .signify configuration, and my collection of .sigs does *not* contain only M$ bashing :-) greetings -- vbi -- Windows: the ultimate triumph of marketing over technology.
Attachment:
pgpf52z5AhKte.pgp
Description: signature