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

Re: POSIX shell; bash ash pdksh & /bin/sh


On 3 Aug 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:

> 	I stand corrected, then. If mawk/awk was not the package from
>  whome the essential flag was removed, which was it then?

procps, at least.

Did we promise implicitly that /bin/ps was always in the system?
It seems we didn't.

>  Santiago> However, I have not heard any horror stories about a
>  Santiago> package to break because of awk not being in the
>  Santiago> system. Why not? Because mawk was "Priority: required".
> 	No, because base-files, an essential package, depends on
>  awk. Dependencies of essential packages are paid a great deal
>  of attention to.

I was talking about bo, when base-files did not depend on awk yet.

For years we have shipped a system in which all awk versions could be
removed, since none of them was essential, but we have not heard any
horror stories about the lack of a working awk, at least I don't remember
any. I think that the reason for this is that mawk was required, and
people usually do not remove required packages just for fun.

If we ever make bash non-essential, and we do it right (i.e. like Raul
explained it would have to be done), I guess people will not even notice
that bash became non-essential as long as it continues to be a required

Version: 2.6.3ia
Charset: latin1


To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: