attn: which, bzip2,gzip maintainers (was Re: some problems with setup.ini)

Christopher Faylor
Sat Nov 17 16:39:00 GMT 2001

On Wed, Nov 28, 2001 at 07:39:38AM -0800, Joshua Franklin wrote:
>> > rxvt is still in shells, not utils
>> I'm still not 100% sure that utils is appropriate.
>Me neither. I argued for "base" :)

Arguing for "base" doesn't necessarily solve the real problem.  People
seem to be forgetting that packages can exist in multiple categories.

I think that gzip and bzip2 obviously belong in the same category.
gzip is already in Base.  Probably bzip2 belongs there too.  I think
that both should also be in "Utils".  Currently only bzip2 is in Utils.

I don't think rxvt belongs in Base.

>Actually...what happened to that list I made of stuff to be installed
>by default?  IIRC, less was in that list, and we just got someone
>complaining on about less not being installed by
>default.  What's going on here?

I think I pointed out that the current category list came mainly from
Debian.  I don't agree with less being in the base.  So, as the less
maintainer, it hasn't been moved.

>Wasn't ``someone'' going to move around several packages?  Do the
>maintainers have to do this themselves, or can the hand of fate push
>around package categories?

I have no problem with maintainers moving their packages into another
category unless someone wants to do something nonsensical like move
bash into "compression utilities" or something.


More information about the Cygwin-apps mailing list