Re: coreutils with acl support
On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 06:35:59AM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=debian-devel&m=105896394013190&w=2
>
> Following from the above discussion I notice that libattr1 and libacl1 are
> libs/required, shouldn't they be base/required instead?
The base section has got less and less useful over the years, and now
carries precious little semantic content since the definition of base is
"whatever debootstrap installs". I think libs is a better fit.
--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@flatline.org.uk]
Reply to: