Re: iproute

[Mike Hommey <mh@glandium.org>]

On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 03:02:50AM -0800, Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 08, 2007 at 02:10:09PM -0800, Matt Taggart wrote:
> > (cc requested please, I'm not subscribed)
> 
> > Hi debian-release,
> 
> > I noticed that the iproute package is priority optional. Aren't we supposed to 
> > be transitioning to the ip tool and away from ifconfig/route? We obviously 
> > won't do this for etch, but I was thinking maybe increasing the priority to 
> > ensure that etch systems have it installed would help transitioning in the 
> > lenny timeframe.
> 
> > What do you think?
> 
> I don't think package priorities should be used to encourage testing; the
> package priority should be raised when iproute as a package is a suitable
> replacement for ifconfig in the Debian system.  And I don't think iproute is
> effectively "important" today the way net-tools is, either from the user
> viewpoint or as a dependency of other tools that warrant prio: important.

It was my understanding that net-tools are (or are being) deprecated for
linux in favor of iproute. It's not about testing anymore, but pushing
the use of modern tools to handle network configuration.

I don't think that needs a priority bump, anyways.

Mike