Craig, Thanks for this.
On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 08:08:37PM +1100, Craig Small wrote: > I'll need the assistance of the sysvinit-utils maintainers (CC'ed) as > well, as pidof will be moving from that package. IIUC, the proposal[1] was to create a new Essential procps-base just containing pidof. Otherwise bin:procps would have to become Essential itself. Its installed size is about 20 times larger than sysvinit-util and that wouldn't contribute to shrinking the Essential set. I think this approach would also require a debian-devel email announcing the addition to the Essential set and I suppose the new src:procps will need a trip through NEW. > So I'm looking at https://wiki.debian.org/PackageTransition > and assuming procps is 2:4.0.4-2 and sysvinit-utils is 3.08-3 > I would create procps 2:4.0.4-3 with pidof and Breaks: sysvinit-utils > (<< 3.0.8-4) and Replaces: sysvinit-utils (<< 3.0.8-4) > sysvinit-utils maintainers create 3.08-4 without pidof and have Breaks: > procps (<< 2:4.0.4-3) The dependencies would then be:- procps-base: Breaks: sysvinit-utils (<< 3.0.8-4) Replaces: sysvinit-utils (<< 3.0.8-4) sysvinit-utils without pidof: Breaks: procps-base (<< 2:4.0.4-3) I hope I have understood the previous discussions correctly . I am not trying to stand in the way at all, just ensure that this transition is worthwhile and done correctly. With best wishes Mark [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=810018#10
