Re: Using GNU's install-info in Debian instead of dpkg's install-info
Ian Zimmerman writes ("Re: Using GNU's install-info in Debian instead of dpkg's install-info"):
> One more thing: the longer this thread gets, the more I think that the
> original bug is in fact the inclusion of i-i in dpkg.
I'm afraid I have to disagree with you there. There is nothing wrong
with dpkg containing these relatively small utilities, and adding more
Essential packages (often with complex version-depebndent
cross-dependencies which are difficult to express) just complicates
matters.
> dpkg is a large and crucially important package, and that means the
> maintainers always have something more urgent to do than fixing i-i. We
> should move it into the info package and make the postinstall code
> conditional on info being installed.
There is no particular reason why the people in charge of install-info
would have to be blocked by the maintainers of the rest of the dpkg
package. Lots of ways of organising this are possible that don't
depend on a package split.
Ian.
Reply to: