Bug#809204: closed by Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> (Re: Bug#809204: busybox is required but not installed)
>>>>> "BH" == Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> writes:
BH> On Mon, 2015-12-28 at 21:20 +0800, 積丹尼 Dan Jacobson wrote:
>> OK I find BUSYBOX=y.
>> But I don't think I ever tampered with that file.
BH> That is the default.
>> That means that ... you are going to have a lot of people with
>> problems shortly...
BH> Perhaps, but busybox is also installed by default so you have to remove
BH> it to get into this situation.
So is Windows! They would have to remove Windows and install Linux to
have Linux. All I know is you are breaking all five of my machines...
until I now know I you don't even Suggest or Recommend busybox. You are
setting a dangerous precedence by not putting it in Depends. Can you
find one single package "as broken as this" on Debian? What is the big
harm in putting it in Depends (: busybox|something_else) then? The user
won't be offended as he is already choosing a different configuration so
can do something different in two places instead of one. I don't know
what you mean by default (maybe "automatic installation of Debian via
CDrom tasksel or what ever that was called but that is a very weak
supposition to gamble with when a correct Depends is the proper way and .....
Reply to: