On Feb 20, Stefano Zacchiroli <zack@debian.org> wrote: > I've seen this for other safety-critical tools, e.g. the dar backup tool > which comes both as "dar" and "dar-static". I personally don't believe > there would be *much* use of "dpkg-static", but having it around for a > release would enable to see if/how many (paranoid) people actually > install it. Would that make sense in your opinion? Would it be worth? I don't think so. Can you think of some real life disaster scenarios which would benefit from a static dpkg? And in that case, why it would not be simpler to copy the dpkg binary and the few libraries it depends on from another system? -- ciao, Marco
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature