Re: base packages / essential packages / required packages

[Chris Fearnley <cjf@netaxs.com>]

'Ian Jackson wrote:'
>
>There seems to be a bit of confusion about which packages should have
>`Essential: yes', which should have the `required' priority, which
>should be in the `base' section/directory and which should be on the
>base disks.

[...]

>Here is my analysis of the packages in myrddin's
>unstable/binary-i386/base directory.  Packages in section `base' are
>installed on a virgin system fresh from the basedisks.  Packages with
>a priority other than `important' do not have an Essential field.
>
>Package         Section Priority?       Essential?
>adduser         base    important
>ae              base    important
[...]
>findutils       base    required        yes
>gawk            base    required        yes

I intend to replace gawk with mawk.  Moving gawk into devel (both
saving disk space and using the faster version).  I've already built
mawk with essential: yes, etc.

Let me know if anyone objects to this plan.

The only problem I forsee is a bug in the current alpha kernels (at
least, 1.3.70).  Where the Makefile contains the line "AWK = gawk".
Clearly, this line should allow mawk by referencing "awk".  I have
built this kernel by editing the Makefile and making mawk the default.
It works fine.

Unfortunately, I'm out-of-town for two weeks.  I'll upload the "base"
mawk once I finish reading your comments in debian-devel after I get
back.

Thanks.

-- 
Christopher J. Fearnley            |    UNIX SIG Leader at PACS
cjf@netaxs.com                     |    (Philadelphia Area Computer Society)
http://www.netaxs.com/~cjf         |    Design Science Revolutionary
ftp://ftp.netaxs.com/people/cjf    |    Explorer in Universe
"Dare to be Naive" -- Bucky Fuller |    Linux Advocate