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

[Tobias Powalowski]

Am Dienstag 07 Dezember 2010 schrieb Dieter Plaetinck:
> 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.
> 
> Dieter
You can fool pacman by adding a extra repo to the iso image, i do this in 
archboot isos to fix issues with packages that are in extra.

greetings
tpowa

-- 
Tobias Powalowski
Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa)
http://www.archlinux.org
tpowa at archlinux.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/attachments/20101207/584397b5/attachment.bin>