On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 15:07:21 -0700 Josh Triplett <j...@joshtriplett.org> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 02:01:14PM +0100, Andreas Henriksson wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 10:34:58AM +0000, Mark Hindley wrote: > > > Craig, > > > > > > Thanks for this. > > > > > > This dates from before my detailed involvement with this area of Debian. I have > > > read through the bug report, but apologies if I have missed pertinent detail. > > [....] > > > 3) A desire to reduce the Essential set. > > > > > > I understand and appreciate the general motivation for this. However, moving > > > pidof to procps would make procps Essential and it is already about 20 times > > > bigger than sysvinit-utils, so it does not achieve the aim. > > [...] > > > > I don't see why you think pidof (and thus entire procps) must be > > Essential. That would indeed be counter-productive. (I haven't re- read > > the discussion, but I'm pretty sure we already covered this.) > > > > As I've already proven elsewhere sysvinit-utils (with or without pidof, > > which AFAIR is the only semi-useful utility left in that binary package) > > can be made non-essential without any problems already. > > > > > What do you think? > > > > I think apart from reducing the essential set, it is also useful to > > eliminate pointless differences. > > > > The distributions I've looked at (that are not just following along as a > > debian derivate) uses procps pidof already. > > Exactly. And there have already been issues in which pidof's behavior > changed in unexpected ways because of the needs of sysvinit (e.g. > https://bugs.debian.org/926896 ). Decoupling the two makes such issues > less likely, and removes the one way in which systems not otherwise > using sysvinit have a dependency on sysvinit components. > > I wouldn't expect procps to become essential; ideally packages that use > pidof in scripts would add an appropriate dependency. (This would help > people building minimal containers/chroots.) But orthogonally, I think > there's value in migrating pidof to procps.
Hi Craig, Now that Bookworm has shipped, what about finally finishing this and getting rid of this debianism? There is really no reason to delay it any longer at this point. Thank you! -- Kind regards, Luca Boccassi
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
