Re: Intent To Split: netbase

[John Goerzen <jgoerzen@progenylinux.com>]

Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> writes:

> John Goerzen <jgoerzen@progenylinux.com> wrote:
> >
> > packages, splitting up netstd into many tiny packages, and splitting
> > up netbase are all bad ideas.
> 
> If netstd weren't split up, all the plethora of finger daemons,
> ident daemons and what not would've had to gone through the kind
> of ritual torturing endured by packages that replaced part of the
> old netstd package had.

There is no reason that there would have had to be any conflict at
all.  The various fingers should not conflict with each other
(although I note that some of them erroneously do anyway) -- one
should be perfectly able to have more than one on the machine at
once.  Just make sure they don't trample over each other in the
filesystem and you're find.

> Not to mention how painful it would've been to construct nfs-kernel-server
> with nfs-user-server still part of netstd.

I agree it probably made sense to split that part out.  However we now
have a situation where such basic things at traceroute are not
installed by default, which is a horrible shame.

-- 
John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org>                       www.complete.org
Sr. Software Developer, Progeny Linux Systems, Inc.    www.progenylinux.com
#include <std_disclaimer.h>                     <jgoerzen@progenylinux.com>