Re: MBF proposal: pidof used without Depends: procps

On Thu, May 07, 2026 at 12:44:48AM +0200, Gioele Barabucci wrote:
>The aim of this MBF is to add procps to the dependencies of 94 package 
>that make use of `pidof` at runtime. (The use of pidof in 
>initscritpts, build-time tests, and autopkgstests will be addressed 
>separately. See #810018 for more information.)
>
>The proposed wordings of the MBF can be found below. The corresponding 
>dd-list is attached. The list of affected packages was created by 
>refining the ~6000 results from codesearch.d.n for "pidof" using a 
>mixture of classification scripts and manual review. There are 
>probably a few false positives.

>Colin Watson <[email protected]>
>   netcfg (U)
>   rootskel (U)
[...]
>Debian Install System Team <[email protected]>
>   finish-install
>   netcfg
>   rootskel

Could you please exclude all the udebs from this MBF?  Those are false 
positives, as in d-i pidof is provided by busybox-udeb and is guaranteed 
to be available without needing a dependency.

Thanks,