On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 16:55:09 +0200 Luca Capello <l...@pca.it> wrote: > On Sun, 16 Oct 2011 00:48:11 +0200, Josh Triplett wrote: > > Neil Williams wrote: > >> On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 22:29:56 +0200 > >> Andreas Barth <a...@not.so.argh.org> wrote: > >> > * Neil Williams (codeh...@debian.org) [111015 22:23]: > >> > > The problem with "Standard" is that it is currently (and heavily) > >> > > biased > >> > > towards multi-user servers and most of the replies in this thread which > >> > > decry the absence of an MTA would appear to come from those principally > >> > > concerned with servers. It just doesn't fit with desktop users or > >> > > embedded users. > >> > > >> > "Standard" is just another word for "what someone expect so it's > >> > considered as normal unix", which *is* a multi-user server. > >> > > >> > Perhaps the task isn't named perfect, but that's just what standard > >> > is. > >> > >> If it was just a task used by tasksel, I'd be happy. The connotation of > >> Priority: standard in debian/control is somewhat different and, to me > >> at least, completely unnecessary. > >> > >> tasksel doesn't need anything in the Packages file, so why do we still > >> retain Priority: in debian/control other than for Priority: required? > >> The list of standard packages could just live in /usr/share/tasksel/ - > >> only one place to change it. > >> > >> Why is it anywhere else? > > > > As far as I know, Priority has the following non-cosmetic uses: > > - d-i installs everything >= important by default. > > - tasksel's standard task, selected by default in d-i, additionally > > installs packages with priority standard. > > It seems there is *no* tasksel's standard task:
Hmm, thanks for checking, Luca. > So I stand corrected by myself for the installation tests I did last > week [1]. And in this vision, what d-i shows as a tasksel's "standard" > tasks is actually not a tasksel's task at all. Is this a bug? I suspect it's tasksel or d-i doing stuff on the Priority:, so maybe it's time to export that list from Priority: into a dedicated task. Is there any other reason to have Priority: standard in debian/control? In that process, the actual packages can be moved around and it would make it easier for people like Emdebian to provide a replacement standard task. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgpRe25zW0ToT.pgp
Description: PGP signature
