Sean Whitton, le mer. 10 févr. 2021 16:44:30 -0700, a ecrit: > On Thu 11 Feb 2021 at 12:21AM +01, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > Sean Whitton, le lun. 08 févr. 2021 11:10:43 -0700, a ecrit: > >> On Mon 08 Feb 2021 at 10:19AM +01, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote: > >> > > >> > bsdmainutils has become a transitional package in bullseye. It would be > >> > great if we don't install it by default - right now its Priority: > >> > important. > >> > >> I'm happy to go right ahead and lower the priority of the package that's > >> only transitional, as it having a higher priority is not achieving > >> anything at all. > > > > Yes, please. > > Done.
Thanks! > >> It seems appropriate to start a discussion on -devel about not > >> installing those various utils by default by not raising the priority of > >> the package they're not in, however? > > > > With the three "not" I didn't understand which way you wanted to mean > > something. > > Heh, sorry. It seems appropriate to start a discussion on -devel to see > if anyone thinks it's a problem for us to stop shipping those various > utils in the base install, which would be achieved by raising the > priority of the package which now contains them, in addition to lowering > the priority of this one. Ok now I understand, thanks :) As I mentioned previously in the bug, bsdutils (required) recommends bsdextrautils, so for that part things don't change. For calendar and cal/ncal, the question indeed holds. For bsdmainutils maintainers: I guess the goal of splitting them out of bsdmainutils was precisely to not install them by default? Samuel
