On Sun, Dec 30, 2007 at 08:29:27PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > Magnus Holmgren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > AFAIU, the base subsection was obsoleted with Etch (apparently, its > > removal was discussed already in 1997), and (almost) all packages moved > > to ordinary subsections, like other packages. However, it is still > > listed in section 2.4 and referred to in section 3.7. > > > I think policy should contain or point to the real definition of the > > base system. > > That would be great. Could you, or someone else, get together with the > debian-installer folks and whoever else would be an expert in what > constitutes the base system and propose new wording for Policy?
I don't have time to do the wordsmithing, but I can be your expert witness. debian-installer (specifically, debootstrap) now simply installs everything with Priority: required or Priority: important as the base system, and has done so for some time. See the changelog for debootstrap 0.3.1. > Also, do you have a reference for the obsolescence of the base section? > Even without the real definition of base (which I suspect is actually done > by priority), if that section isn't used any more, we should remove it. > (And remove it from lintian, etc.) I seem to remember that ftpmaster went through a while back and moved everything from base to other sections. A couple of packages seem to have sneaked back in, though; on my unstable system, I see lustre-source with Section: base and zd1211-firmware with Section: non-free/base (!). Unfortunately the list of sections in dak's configuration file appears to be global rather than per-suite, so it might require some work to make base an invalid section from here on without breaking old suites. Removing it from lintian would be good, though. -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
