On 14/11/23 11:11, Helmut Grohne wrote:
I welcome the effort in general. Like Andreas, I question whether having
pidof remain essential is useful. A quick codesearch
https://codesearch.debian.net/search?q=%5Cbpidof%5Cb&literal=0 suggests
that we have less than 500 source packages that even mention it. Many
uses are in test suites or documentation, so the final number will be
lower still.
Last year Andreas and I had a quick look at what it would take to remove
all pidof instances from maintscripts. In a couple of days we fixed a
dozen packages.
This is our progress log: <https://salsa.debian.org/-/snippets/621>.
In short, there are only 23 packages whose maintscripts assume the
presence of pidof and that need to be fixed.
Regards,
--
Gioele Barabucci
