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

Re: base dependency warning



On Mon, Dec 20, 1999 at 02:06:59PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Nice post - did you sumit the proposal ?  I vote "for".
> 
> I asked what people thought and got no responses until now. But yeah, I can
> make a formal proposal; please second. As it stands, policy says:
> 
> 2.3.6. Base packages
> --------------------
> 
>      The packages included in the `base' section have a special function.
>      They form a minimum subset of the Debian GNU/Linux system that is
>      installed before everything else on a new system.  Thus, only very few
>      packages are allowed to go into the `base' section to keep the required
>      disk usage very small.
> 
>      Most of these packages should have the priority value `required' or at
>      least `important', and many of them will be tagged `essential' (see
>      below).
> 
>      You must not place any packages into the `base' section before this has
>      been discussed on the debian-devel' mailing list and a consensus about
>      doing that has been reached.
> 
> Since Adam tells us this is no longer true and the boot-floppies team
> decides what goes in the base system, and since we seem to have a consensus
> that the base section is then unnecessary, policy needs to be updated. 
> 
> Since other parts of policy refer to "the base system", we still need some
> definition of what that system is, or quite a few paragraphs (see end of
> this email) would need to be changed. Here is one way we could reword policy:
> 
> | 2.3.6. The base system 
>   ----------------------
> |
> |   The base system is a minimum subset of the Debian GNU/Linux system that is
>     installed before everything else on a new system.  Thus, only very few 
> |   packages are allowed to go into the base system to keep the
> |   required disk usage very small.
> 
>     Most of these packages should have the priority value `required' or at
>     least `important', and many of them will be tagged `essential' (see
>     below).
> 
>     You must not place any packages into the `base' section before this has
>     been discussed on the `debian-devel' mailing list and a consensus about
>     doing that has been reached.

I don't think the last 3 lines need to remain in policy.  Any issues with
removing them?  Otherwise this sounds good to me.

-- 
- Joseph Carter         GnuPG public key:   1024D/DCF9DAB3, 2048g/3F9C2A43
- knghtbrd@debian.org   20F6 2261 F185 7A3E 79FC  44F9 8FF7 D7A3 DCF9 DAB3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
0 7     * * *   echo "...Linux is just a fad" | mail billg@microsoft.com -s "And remember..."

Attachment: pgpDquQQMXUhn.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: