On Tue 25 Sep 2018 at 13:24:48 +0200, Thomas Schmitt wrote: > Brian wrote: > > There can be no dispute over the meaning of "standard system > > utilities". These are the ones which have a "Priority: standard" > > field in the package description. > > There can always be a dispute. q.e.d.
You're after a fight, aren't you? :) > (Hey. You smuggled the word "system" between "standard" and "utility.) You noticed! I wonder whether the OP did? Does it count as going off-topic? > Higher than "standard" are priorities "required" and "important". > > But i am not sure whether the official classification in > https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive.html#s-priorities > of the first three priorities really matches the idea of a set of > "standard [system] utilities": > > "standard > These packages provide a reasonably small but not too limited > character-mode system." > > I.e. no X Window System: > https://tracker.debian.org/media/packages/x/xorg/control-1%3A7.7%2B19 > No command line CD/DVD/BD burning: > https://tracker.debian.org/media/packages/c/cdrkit/control-9%3A1.1.11-3 > https://tracker.debian.org/media/packages/d/dvd%2Brw-tools/control-7.1-12 > https://tracker.debian.org/media/packages/libi/libisoburn/control-1.4.8-3 Aren't standard utilities whatever you want them to be? Who could live without netcat, midnight commander and oneko? > Have a nice day :) You're not helping. :) -- Brian.
