On 9 Dec 1999, Chris Waters wrote: > I'm a little bit afraid that this opens the door to endless debates > about what the "core functionality" of a package is. For example, I > would have considered the "core functionality" of the bash package to > be providing /bin/bash, but someone was trying to claim that it is > providing /bin/sh.
I don't think this is a real problem - "core functionality" of an essential package is all functionality that other packages implicitly depend on. For the essential pacakge providing /bin/sh (aka bash) that file is part of the reason it is essential, thus it is a "core functionality". Jason
