Re: Downgrading the priority of nfs-utils
Wouter Verhelst <email@example.com> writes:
> On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 11:50:09AM -0500, Matthias Julius wrote:
> Then perhaps you shouldn't be changing a winning team? ;-)
Who are you referring to?
>> This in practice means almost the same. If it is selected by default
>> only very few users will de-select it.
Well, I should have worded that differently. The above is a bit too
absolute. I guess, it all depends on the demographics of the Debian
>> On the other hand, if someone needs it it's easy to install.
> If you don't need it, it's also easy to remove.
Of course. If you know it is installed and that you don't need it.
> In other words, it doesn't have to be essential for the system to work
> in order to be installed by default. The ability to mount
> NFS-filesystems most certainly is part of the expectation of an
> experienced Unix person; thus, it should be part of the set of
> "important" packages and should be installed by default.
> I see no reason to change that; the definitions in policy are sound this
Well, Idon't want to argue with the policy. It is certainly not
unreasonable as it is.