Re: Intent To Split: netbase
Alex, you still Cc'ed Adam, and I'm quite sure that he's reading -devel.
On 10 Aug 2000, Alex Romosan <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> if this is what you're referring to:
> I intend to split netbase into a plethora of little packages based
> on how they're distributed upstream. The new netbase package won't
> quite be virtual: it'll still include some bits of infrastructure
> (like update-inetd, and /etc/init.d/networking), but it's main job
> will be depending on all the real tools.
> i've read it right after i tried to uninstall the packages i didn't
> want only to discover i couldn't do it. so netbase was split upstream.
> great, now i can install only the parts that i want. but i can't
> because netbase still depends on all these packages. so i would argue
You keep ignoring that Anthony stated some times that this dependency
will be droped in the future.
> that this defeats the split upstream. moreover it introduces an
> empty package.
It's _not_ an empty package, as also stated in the paragraph you
quoted. Please start reading the messages you answer to.
"Has anyone had problems with the computer accounts?"
"Yes, I don't have one."
"Okay, you can send mail to one of the tutors ..."
-- E. D'Azevedo, Computer Science 372