Re: Accepted sdm 0.4.1-2 (source all)
Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@freegeek.org> writes:
> On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 02:40:37PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
>> My understanding was that dash was only in the Essential set as the
>> default provider of /bin/sh, and that /bin/dash was explicitly *not*
>> guaranteed to stay in Essential, and thus packages using that need to
>> keep their dependencies. Did I misunderstand, or is the above change
>> wrong?
> well, lintian warns either way you do it, hence the override:
> http://bugs.debian.org/587209
> some clarity on how to handle that would be nice, yes.
Yes, we need to fix that one way or the other.
I think it's moderately unlikely that we're going to manage to keep dash
from being treated as essential even if we say that it's only essential
for the /bin/sh functionality.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: