Re: RFC: cups as "default" printing system for lenny?
On Sun, Nov 11, 2007 at 07:12:35PM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> Russ Allbery <email@example.com> writes:
> > Also, do we really need *any* printing system as priority: standard? It's
> > not clear to me that printing is still really part of a standard Unix
> > installation, even for desktop users (and it definitely isn't for
> > servers).
> I believe it to be one of the more important bits of a standard Unix
> *desktop* installation - but this just reminds me of the fact that I'm
> quite uncomfortable with keeping a system like package priorities around
> for much longer. Diverging use-cases (like in this case) show that one
> definition of "standard" isn't really helpful anymore.
Well, sure it is; it defines the lowest common denominator that we think
should be installed by default on all systems. Just because it may be
difficult to decide what that is doesn't make "standard" irrelevant, because
we still /do/ have to decide what we're going to install by default. :)
> I think we may want to start thinking about getting rid of the whole
> thing and switching to something which allows us to express more complex
> importance measurements for packages. In fact, d-i and its task system
> have been a step in that direction, so we maybe should evaluate if we
> want to formalize it a bit more and get it into policy to replace
The d-i task system looks at the Priority: standard packages to assemble the
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.