Bug#403120: marking lsb-base essential?

tags 403120 +wontfix
thanks

Hi Steffen, and thanks for your bugreport,

Le 14.12.2006 21:31, Steffen Joeris a écrit :
> Yesterday I saw a package which uses the shell functions provided by
> lsb-base but did not have a dependency against it and I came across this
> topic.

That's a bug.

> Currently lsb-base is required and prodivdes the init script
> functions which should be used by the init scripts if possible.
> Therefore I would suggest to mark lsb-base essential and thus making the
> dependency against lsb-base unnecessary (of course except for specific
> versions) as we want the init scripts in Debian to get standardized with
> the lsb functions anyway.

In my opinion, the Essential set of packages should stay as minimal as
possible. The things in that set are what is absolutely needed to run a
Debian system and I don't consider lsb-base to qualify to that.

So at least _I_ am not going to push this change (hence tagging as
wontfix) but wouldn't block people pushing it.

Cheers,

OdyX

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (MingW32)
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=ITgP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----