[arch-general] Add wpa_supplicant to the Group 'Base'
csupercomputergeek at gmail.com
Tue Apr 28 17:04:29 UTC 2015
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 1:59 PM, Sam Stuewe <halosghost at archlinux.info>
> This may just be my personal opinion, but I have always thought that
> `base` was supposed to be the absolute bare minimum to have a bootable
> installation. From that view, it makes sense that a few very small
> editors made sense in `base` back when Arch wasn't net-install only.
> Now, however, since Arch is only officially supported for netinstall
> only and getting an editor on your fresh new install is as simple as
> running `pacstrap -i /mnt <youreditornamehere>` from the installation
> medium. I am unconvinced that vi (or vim-minimal) or nano actually have
> a place in `base`.
> Honestly, I think an idea world would put pacman, linux, systemd, bash,
> a few bootloaders, efi-related utilities and their dependencies in
> `base` and essentially nothing else.
> Having said that, I think it makes perfect sense to have nano and
> vim-minimal on the installation media, but I think of “what is on the
> installation media” and “what is in `base`” as being two separate
> All the best,
People forget vi(1) is part of POSIX so required on "systems that both
support the User Portability Utilities option and define the
POSIX2_CHAR_TERM symbol." [http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/
The former is probably a good idea, seeing as the User Portability
Utilities option in POSIX is written to be: "a requirement for a user
portability interactive system. It is required frequently except for those
systems, such as embedded realtime or dedicated application systems, that
support little or no interactive time-sharing work by users or operators"
The latter is defined to mean that at least one terminal type has all user
Unless Arch Linux wants to be deliberately non-POSIX compatible, vi should
be in base.
More information about the arch-general