Re: udftools, pktsetup and init scripts

[Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>]

Tollef Fog Heen writes ("Re: udftools, pktsetup and init scripts"):
>] Pali Rohár 
> 
> > What do you think about moving pktsetup into own binary package? Users
> > who do not need packet writing configuration and only need tools for UDF
> > filesystem would install only udftools package.
>
> udftools is a tiny package, splitting it seems a bit meaningless.

AIUI the point of splitting it would be to allow people to avoid the
udev rule.  It is often a good idea to separate packages containing
quiescent utilities from packages containing automatical-launching
configuration etc.

> > But such thing probably needs more discussion or announcement in
> > changelog... etc... as existing system configurations needs to be
> > updated.
> 
> If you do split it, udftools need to depend on pktsetup for the next
> release at least so people don't lose that functionality.

Presumably that's OK because the previous udftools package did this
automatic stuff too, only a different way.

FTR I don't have an objection to dropping the init script in favour of
a udev rule.

Ian.

-- 
Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>   These opinions are my own.

If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.