Bug#3100: bug#3100

[Bdale Garbee <bdale@gag.com>]

I believe that the right thing to do is either to have the 'rmt' executable
be provided as part of the tar package (not with cpio, as Brian Mays proposed
in his reply to this bug report, since tar is a base package and cpio is not),
or it should be kept as part of a separate package.  The more I think about it,
the more I favor the latter.

Brian and I have exchanged email about rmt being with tar instead of cpio,
and he asked whether 'mt' should then become part of the tar package as well.
It's not clear to me that this aggregation of mt with a particular archiver
makes any sense.  Opinions?

The more I think about it, the more I like the notion that rmt be part of a
package with or without mt that is suggested by tar and cpio.  It's not
essential for either, it's not necessary for rmt/mt to be present in a base
system, and yet it also makes no sense to force someone to install a cpio
package if all they want is the rmt executable to use with tar, dump, or
something else that knows how to use it.

Thoughts?

Bdale