[arch-dev-public] nilfs-utils moving in core

Dieter Plaetinck dieter at plaetinck.be
Tue Dec 7 11:13:06 EST 2010

On Tue, 07 Dec 2010 16:26:00 +0100
Pierre Schmitz <pierre at archlinux.de> wrote:

> On Tue, 07 Dec 2010 14:45:45 +0100, Thomas Bächler
> <thomas at archlinux.org> wrote:
> > Am 07.12.2010 14:40, schrieb Ionuț Bîru:
> >> Hi,
> >> i come across https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/20261 and i see
> >> Dieter added support in aif for it but it needs to be added in
> >> core to include it on the cd.
> > 
> > That is not true. Packages don't have to be in core to be included
> > in the installation environment.
> I second this. If the reason for moving a package to core is that the
> installer cannot handle it otherwise the installer needs to be fixed.

Like I said in my previous mail, the reason is we only include core on
the install images (because core contains all "system-critical
utilities"), so if we want to make the user able to install mkfs.nilfs
for example, it needs to be in core.

> The idea of core was to provide a minimal set of packages that are
> needed by nearly all users to set up a base system. Our sign-off
> procedure ensures that we don't put broken packages by accident there.

That makes sense.  Although I thought that's what base is for.

However, assuming "if you install on a foo-filesystem with aif, you
should install foo-utils as well;  so that at least your system doesn't
break when it needs to run fsck.foo after x mounts" is true (is it?)
this would mean we have a problem:
on one hand we want to keep core contain only the critical utilities
needed by most people, on the other hand we
are bleeding edge and want to provide whatever upstream provides - this
includes a wide array of filesystem possibilites - except that we can't
put the corresponding tools in core when not many folks use them.


More information about the arch-dev-public mailing list