Re: utilities
On Tue 25 Sep 2018 at 13:24:48 +0200, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
> Brian wrote:
> > There can be no dispute over the meaning of "standard system
> > utilities". These are the ones which have a "Priority: standard"
> > field in the package description.
>
> There can always be a dispute. q.e.d.
You're after a fight, aren't you? :)
> (Hey. You smuggled the word "system" between "standard" and "utility.)
You noticed! I wonder whether the OP did? Does it count as going
off-topic?
> Higher than "standard" are priorities "required" and "important".
>
> But i am not sure whether the official classification in
> https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive.html#s-priorities
> of the first three priorities really matches the idea of a set of
> "standard [system] utilities":
>
> "standard
> These packages provide a reasonably small but not too limited
> character-mode system."
>
> I.e. no X Window System:
> https://tracker.debian.org/media/packages/x/xorg/control-1%3A7.7%2B19
> No command line CD/DVD/BD burning:
> https://tracker.debian.org/media/packages/c/cdrkit/control-9%3A1.1.11-3
> https://tracker.debian.org/media/packages/d/dvd%2Brw-tools/control-7.1-12
> https://tracker.debian.org/media/packages/libi/libisoburn/control-1.4.8-3
Aren't standard utilities whatever you want them to be? Who could live
without netcat, midnight commander and oneko?
> Have a nice day :)
You're not helping. :)
--
Brian.
Reply to: