On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 09:34:16AM +0300, Otto Kekäläinen wrote: > Solving this is _not_ straightforward (for me) because of two reasons: > 1) I personally never used just the core package and I don't fully > understand the motivation why it even exists. Is Akonadi the only use > case? > 2) The mysql-5.6 packaging is a bit messed up (double entries in > install file, server-core having the mysql_upgrade binary but the > postinst part and init file that could trigger it automatically are > only in the server package) so I it would not make sense to model > mariadb-10.0 packaging after it in this case.
My understanding of the -core package (like you, this is from before my time) is that some users want the binaries, but none of the automatic configuration and maintainer scripts. So the -core package just makes the binaries available so they can then use MySQL as they want, receive security updates and so forth, but aren't tied to any of the assumptions that the maintainer and init scripts make. For this reason I believe it makes sense for mysql_upgrade and any other binaries be provided through the -core package, even if the only consumer that we can see is in the -server (not -core) package. Because then users who don't want the non-core package can also use it. So I don't know what you mean by "double entries in install file" (I haven't looked), but the rest of what you describe is I believe intentional and correct. HTH, Robie
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
