| 1 |
On 09/05/14 16:08, Micha³ Górny wrote: |
| 2 |
> Dnia 2014-09-05, o godz. 12:34:11 |
| 3 |
> William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> napisa³(a): |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> there is a bug open requesting that we add sys-apps/iproute2 to the |
| 6 |
>> system set [1]. Originally the request was to drop net-tools, but it has |
| 7 |
>> become just adding iproute2. |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> If no one objects, I would like to do this sometime in the next 72 |
| 10 |
>> hours by adding sys-apps/iproute2 to profiles/default/linux/packages. |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
>> Thoughts? |
| 13 |
> I object. We should be keeping towards making @system as small |
| 14 |
> as possible, not adding random packages there just because someone |
| 15 |
> happens to use them often. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
I don't like to say no when people want something, but I think here I'm |
| 19 |
with Michal. My idea of @system is that it must be the bare minimum to |
| 20 |
have a "working" system. And for a working system you need just enough |
| 21 |
toolchain, networking and python to be able to bootstrap into whatever |
| 22 |
you want to build from that point. We already have net-tools, so |
| 23 |
iproute2 is not needed. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Why can't you just emerge iproute2 from the stages we already have? |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D. |
| 29 |
Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened] |
| 30 |
E-Mail : blueness@g.o |
| 31 |
GnuPG FP : 1FED FAD9 D82C 52A5 3BAB DC79 9384 FA6E F52D 4BBA |
| 32 |
GnuPG ID : F52D4BBA |
Archives