Re: util-linux seems to have /sbin/fsck
In article <[🔎] 20040111193033.GA17753@deprecation.cyrius.com>,
Martin Michlmayr <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>* Goswin von Brederlow <email@example.com>
>> > I think /sbin/fsck must be packed in not e2fsprogs but util-linux,
>> > How do you think about that? Is it bug?
>> Sounds like a reasonable suggestion.
>#111651: fsck: split out from e2fsprogs?
e2fsprogs and e2fslibs together are ~ 1 MB. Isn't splitting out
fsck from that just creating packages for the sake of creating