Bug#774339: Dependencies
tag 774339 pending
thanks
On 01/01/15 03:36, jnqnfe wrote:
> Depends:
> - util-linux (getopt, mkswap)
> - mount
> - coreutils (cp, mv, rm, touch, mkdir, wc, stat, basename, chroot,
> echo, printf, uname, date, expr, sort, uniq, dirname, head, du, dd,
> rmdir, chmod, ls, tr, cat, cut, pwd, ln; and also sha256sums which will
> be needed by the #718225 solution)
> - findutils (xargs, find)
> - grep
> - dpkg (dpkg, dpkg-query)
> - sed
all of the above are essential, no depends required.
> - gawk
awk is provided through mawk (required), we do not use gawk'isms, no
depends required.
> - gzip (gzip, gunzip, these are used in various places with no choice
> for other compression tools, as well as in places where there is choice)
> - tar
> - diffutils (diff)
> - debianutils (which)
all of the above are essential, no depends required.
> - apt-utils (apt-ftparchive used by binary_package-lists script on line
> 159 and not within chroot, if there are any package lists, which there
> always are, since config makes one)
live-build already handles this (with an error message) in the case the
user builds non-chrooted (which is not the default); but you're right,
this should go to recommends.. done in git.
> - dctrl-tools (grep-aptavail used in share/bin/Packages script)
"Packages" is executed in the chroot, not on the host, no depends required.
> Recommends:
> - sparc-utils (elftoaout and piggyback/piggyback64 used for sparc
> netboot images)
sparc is gone.
> - gpgv (used for progress-linux in bootstrap_archive-keys
added to suggests, thanks.
> Suggests:
> - udev (udevadm binary used if available by functions/losetup.sh)
no, either you already have udev and then it's used, or it's not and
then you don't need it.
> - man-db (man command, used by functions/man.sh if available)
given that man-db is important, i think a suggests is useless.
> - git (used if pulling a config via git)
that's too far fetched imho.
> cpio should actually perhaps be elevated from its existing status under
> recommends to depends, since it is required by the
> installer_debian-installer script for all non-netboot builds in that
> script, and thus in my mind falls under 'required to provide a
> significant amount of functionality'.
d-i inclusion is non-default, so recommends is fine.
> There's also an issue with certain configurable items (e.g. where the
> user has a choice of compression utility) where there is no check within
> Check_defaults() that the binary exists, and another issue that for at
> least one instance of a utility run under chroot no Check_package()
> based check is performed; but both of these can be addressed separately.
> In fact I have now reported them separately.
thanks
--
Address: Daniel Baumann, Donnerbuehlweg 3, CH-3012 Bern
Email: daniel.baumann@progress-technologies.net
Internet: http://people.progress-technologies.net/~daniel.baumann/
Reply to: