Re: The util-linux reorganisation
On Sat, Mar 17, 2001 at 05:27:36PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> I plan to do the following changes to util-linux in the next days:
>
> - merge mount and bsdutils in util-linux
> All three packages are essential and I don't see a reason why they
> should be in separate binary packages.
I don't see one, either, but the changelog says:
util-linux (2.9g-0.3) unstable; urgency=high
* YA NMU.
* Split mount out into separate package so as not to
force the dangerous replacement of an essential package.
-- Joel Klecker <espy@debian.org> Sun, 3 Jan 1999 19:00:31 -0800
bsdutils appears to have been absorbed into the upstream util-linux source, and
the binary package never similarly absorbed. What is (or was) "dangerous"
about replacing an essential package? Perhaps this has something to do with
why bsdutils was left alone as well?
--
- mdz
Reply to: