-------- On Wed, Jun 25 1997 8:35 PDT Bill Mitchell writes: > On Wed, 25 Jun 1997, David Frey wrote: > > 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.
Hmm? I thought to unconditionally mark all packages which include at least one POSIX.2 program with `Important'. I thought the long-term goal of Debian is to get POSIX-branded, so this is in some form a must, isn't it? > 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. Yes, I agree. There are 2 possibilities: 1. break out the needed programs if the package is exotic, or 2. (IMO the better method) mark the whole package important. (Comments welcome) David -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
