Re: Intent To Split: netbase
Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:
> Well, if you wanted half the people running unstable to just blithely
> upgrade and have all their firewalling disappear, you could remove the
> dependencies, I guess.
>
> Dependencies will start getting rearranged in a month or so, I guess.
>
i don't have a problem with the dependencies, i have a problem with an
empty netbase package which forces me to keep all this extra stuff i
never really wanted which i can't remove because a lot of packages
depend on it but shouldn't.
is there a reason why wu-ftpd, fingerd, and so on should depend on
netbase instead of inetd (which should be a virtual package provided
by netkit-inetd and any other inet lookalike)?
the big question really is: why have an empty netbase package? is there
an empty upstream netbase package? to what purpose? every other split
made the original package disappear. why not this one?
--alex--
--
| I believe the moment is at hand when, by a paranoiac and active |
| advance of the mind, it will be possible (simultaneously with |
| automatism and other passive states) to systematize confusion |
| and thus to help to discredit completely the world of reality. |
Reply to: