* On 2020 12 Sep 02:06 -0500, Lone Learner wrote: > POSIX.1-2001 Utilities[1] and POSIX.1-2008 Utilities[2] both list the > commands "bc" and "ed" to be part of POSIX. > > Yet, in a brand new Debian installation (version 10 for example), > these commands are missing by default: > > $ bc > bash: bc: command not found > $ ed > bash: ed: command not found > > Why does Debian not include these commands by default? It's likely because the focus of the Debian Project is not that of shipping a strict POSIX compliant system out of the box. > Of course, I can install them with "apt-get" and I did that. > > apt-get install bc ed I believe that 'apt' is preferred over "apt-get" these days. Simple "apt" works well for me. > The "bc" binary is only 87K in size. The entire package including the > man page and documentation is only 209K in size. > > Similarly the "ed" binary is only 55K in size. The entire package is > only 93K in size. > > What good reason is there not to include these tiny packages even > though they are specified in POSIX? Debian has an opt-in survey of the most used packages/files via the "popularity-contest" package: https://popcon.debian.org/ It likely shows that the utilities in question are not used often so why include something that is seldom used? Those that need them know how to install them and packages that depend on them will install them. Including them by default apparently does little to further the goals of the Debian Project. Of course, as one interested in Debian, you are free to create your own spin that is as POSIX compliant as you can make it. Good luck! - Nate -- "The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears this is true." Web: https://www.n0nb.us Projects: https://github.com/N0NB GPG fingerprint: 82D6 4F6B 0E67 CD41 F689 BBA6 FB2C 5130 D55A 8819
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature