* Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010512 20:19]: > Your point being? As it is, you're allowing all editors to be removed > without dpkg bitching about it and suddenly all these programs calling > editor will start failing.
And any user that comes complaining to policy because dpkg allowed him or herself to remove all editors ought to be laughed at vigorously. Herbert, while I see your concern, we really do have to let the end user have some say about what goes onto his or her computer. And if that end user can't see a need for a fancy editor, *fine*. That same end user probably doesn't see the need for the programs that call editor. And frankly, being without an editor isn't the end of the world. I know I can think of several cheap replacements: dd, cat, echo, (with the help of the shell, which btw also has here-documents), ftp, scp, rcp, smtpd, perl one-liners, ... I leave finding more as an excersize for the reader. If this was an actual problem suffered by actual users, I could see a point to discussing it. I don't think it is, and I don't see a point. -- Earthlink: The #1 provider of unsolicited bulk email to the Internet.