[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Making "may not be removed" and "needed

On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 04:18:22PM +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> * Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> [110404 19:22]:
> > If login worked consistently in the face of the configured shell going
> > missing (automatically falling back to /bin/sh for root), then I think it
> > would be worthwhile to do the work necessary to remove bash from the
> > essential set.  But until then, the primary purpose of Essential, to me, is
> > the "minimal set guaranteed to be usable" aspect, not the "you don't have to
> > depend on it" aspect.

> I think it might be nice if those two aspects could be isolated somehow.
> This could also reduce the size of some build chroots and the set of packages
> any boot-strap code has to handle specially[1]. With all the essential
> stuff only needed for a full system to boot, those are larger than they
> needed to be.

> I think

> e2fsprogs
> login
> mount
> sysvinit
> sysvinit-utils
> util-linux

> and their dependencies (passwd, initscripts, the whole pam stack)
> are mostly not needed in that set[2].
> (Util-linux might have one or two programs one might want to move
> to another package then, and something for update-rc.d needs to be
> done).

I think this is a false optimization.  How does reducing the set of packages
in a buildd chroot help anything?  A typical package has build-dependencies
many times the size of the Essential set.

Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                    http://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com                                     vorlon@debian.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: