[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: "tasksel arch any" vs. "keeping track of n-m in debian-cd"?

On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 10:47:33PM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
>Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org> (07/03/2013):
>> Re #697868, I would much rather leave it to the maintainers of
>> desktop environments (and/or Tech Ctte :P) to ensure that they have
>> eg, necessary network-manager dependencies on appropriate
>> architectures, rather than making tasksel need to track
>> that. Reading that bug, the only reason task-gnome is depending on
>> network-manager is to ensure it gets on CD#1. There are other ways
>> to do that, particularly debian-cd's generate_di+k_list is
>> appropriate since netcfg arranges for network-manager to be
>> installed.
>I know you're joking but that maintainers vs. tech-ctte was insane
>already, so I'd rather adjust d-i (through tasksel) to make sure we
>have decent networking support in the installed system.
>Delegating such things to debian-cd seems like the wrong way to fix
>it, but let's see what Steve thinks of it (personally, I'd hate to
>have to keep track of such things in debian-cd).

What I did for RC1 in debian-cd was to add network-manager and
network-manager-gnome to tasks/wheezy/Debian-{gnome,generic} *before*
task-essential-gnome. That made sure that those two packages made it
onto CD#1 regardless of other dependencies.

I'm OK with doing that kind of thing in future (or for other people to
do it too - just ask for commit access to the debian-cd repo), *but*
only (a) where it's strictly necessary and (b) in limited
circumstances for corner-cases like this. It's very much overkill
territory to do this often, and will be prone to breakage.

Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.                                steve@einval.com
  Armed with "Valor": "Centurion" represents quality of Discipline,
  Honor, Integrity and Loyalty. Now you don't have to be a Caesar to
  concord the digital world while feeling safe and proud.

Reply to: