[arch-general] inetutils and the 'base' group

[Daniel Micay]

On 16/06/14 07:35 PM, Leonid Isaev wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> 	Is there a reason why core/inetutils is in base group, i.e. which
> packages implicitly rely on it? It was added to base around Aug. 2011 ago, I
> think because of hostname(1), but shouldn't this functionality be now provided
> by hostnamectl?
> 
> Thanks,

It's likely just in base because it was viewed as convenient. You can
temporarily change the hostname with `sysctl kernel.hostname=foo` alone
anyway.

AFAIK it's a bug if there's an implicit dependency on base, although
it's not clear if an implicit make dependency on base is allowed as it
is for base-devel. It would be nice if that was spelled out clearly
instead of left up to community documentation on the wiki.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/attachments/20140616/d15208d4/attachment.asc>