Re: Essential pacakges
Jason Gunthorpe writes:
> Yes, but available in the same dist? I think that is wrong. I can see the
> point in having say some package in hamm that obsoletes some package in
> bo, but these two are designed to be available at the same time!
A low-cost solution would be to have an empty essential package
depending on "e2fsprogs | e2compr", none of which would be essential,
which would conflict with, and not replace, each other.
A much more elegant solution would be that I, as e2fsprogs maintainer,
or Tom Lees, who recently updated the e2compr patches, have a look and
see what files are actually changed by this patch, and provide 2
packages that can be installed at the same time. But that may take
some time, and code freeze is coming quickly.
OTOH, Ted T'so (e2fsprogs upstream maintainer) told me that, by the
1.06 time, the e2compr patches were designed in such a way that makes
the ext2 fs less extendable/generic, and that it was highly improbable
to get it incorporated in upstream e2fsprogs. Thus I'm not sure
whether we should encourage its use.
Opinions ?
--
Yann Dirson <ydirson@a2points.com> | Stop making M$-Bill richer & richer,
alt-email: <dirson@univ-mlv.fr> | support Debian GNU/Linux:
debian-email: <dirson@debian.org> | more powerful, more stable !
http://www.a2points.com/homepage/3475232 | Check <http://www.debian.org/>
--
E-mail the word "unsubscribe" to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST. Trouble? E-mail to listmaster@debian.org .
Reply to: