Re: RFD: Essential packages, /, and /usr

[Josip Rodin <joy@gkvk.hr>]

On Sun, Jun 16, 2002 at 01:48:21AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> So, rather than establishing any guidelines for what they're going to
> "absolutely need", we'll just tell them that what they "absolutely need"
> is whatever happens to be in /bin or /sbin today.

> Translation: the intersection of all Essential package maintainers'
> opinions shall determine what will be possible before /usr is mounted.

Well, I'd expect that's actually a matter of opinion of the upstream
maintainers, I doubt the Debian maintainers have strayed too much from what
make install does for them. In any case, the existing set of binaries in /
is defined on a few Unixish principles which despite their non-transparency
are acceptable, and to which we have to stick anyway in order to avoid
breaking stuff.

As far as adding stuff despite the wishes of the maintainer goes, I'm afraid
there's no way around it other than having the Technical Committee decide.

To have the Policy Manual define this wouldn't be viable; if we tried to
make a general rule, it would have to be insanely worded to be proper; if we
tried to list all the binaries one by one, it would be bloated for little
reason.

> Why do you find it so abhorrent to document the assumptions we are
> making about the system before /usr is mounted?

> Documentation good.  Ad hockery bad.

I agree that a written rationale would be a good idea.

Who's volunteering to write it? :)

-- 
     2. That which causes joy or happiness.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org