Re: Packages to install be default for Stretch
[please cc: me on any replies; I saw this on -devel and am not
subscribed to -boot; I don't really think this is a subject that should
be discussed only on -boot anyway, but...]
On Tue, 2015-05-05 at 20:45 +0200, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> [ Please send replies only to boot@ ]
>
> I would like to re-evaluate what we change by default for Stretch, that
> is the list of packages with priorities required, important and
> standard. In general my plan involves installing less, taking into
> consideration that requirements and expectations what should be
> available in containers, chroots, on servers and desktop systems has
> changed (at least IMHO).
I think catering to the needs of those of us installing in chroots etc.
is a Good Thing, but I think before you start suggesting "demoting"
packages from important to standard or standard to optional, it would be
good to remind ourselves what the levels currently mean, and consider
what set of levels would make sense in future.
See section 2.5 of policy at
https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive.html for the
details, but "standard" should be a "reasonably small but not too
limited character-mode system", while "important" is "including those
which one would expect to find on any Unix-like system".
According to those definitions, I think you'll have trouble justifying
many of the demotions you're suggesting -- for example cron, the
man-related packages, traceroute, at, bc, dc, m4, whois...
Actually, looking at the current definitions, I think some of the
packages you're suggesting moving to optional should actually be made
"important".
That suggests to me that the definitions are no longer appropriate. Does
anyone ever install just the "important" set? Perhaps some kind of
merging of standard and important could lead to a sensible default, and
another level be introduced aiming at chroot and container use? What is
actually "almost always" needed in those environments beyond the
"essential" packages? Is it actually worth the effort of having such a
level?
Cheers,
Nick
--
Nick Phillips / nick.phillips@otago.ac.nz / 03 479 4195
# These statements are mine, not those of the University of Otago
Reply to: