On Wed, 25 Jun 1997, David Frey wrote:
[...] > > ``Important programs, including those which one would expect to find > > on any Unix-like system. If the expectation is that an experienced > > Unix person who found it missing would go `What the F*!@<+ is going > > on, where is foo', it should be in important. This is an important > > criterion because we are trying to produce, amongst other things, a > > free Unix.'' (3.1.4.1 of debian-policy 2.1.3.3) > > Correlated note: It is not explicitely stated in the policy manual, but > IMO we should flag all utilities mentioned in the POSIX.2 standard as > 'Important' [...] IMHO, as long as the list is of manageable size, it'd be better to explicitly list the "important" utilities instead of leaving this as a judgement call to be made (differently) by each individual package maintainer. One complicating factor here is utility vs. package granularity. For example: uuencode/uudecode are packaged with sharutils, and ar with binutils. uuencode/uudecode and ar are on your POSIX list, but other utilities in the packages which provide them are not. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
