Re: [gentoo-dev] reason for dhcpcd in system profile ?

[Spider <spider@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1397 bytes --]


ok, this breaks threading but I just got a bounce due to wrong sender
address, (having mailprobs)

---
begin  quote
On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 20:16:07 +0200
Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Sunday 24 August 2003 18:44, Spider wrote:
> > begin  quote
> > On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 11:32:22 -0500
> 
> > > lpr
> >
> > But,  Am I the only one who sees an advantage in moving the default
> > profiles to LSB compliance, and providing an alternated "light" one
> > for the cases that want them? (heck, if you dislike dhcpcd I'm
> > pretty sure you don't want the bloat of glibc either, go for uclibc.
> >  ;) but sarcasm
> > aside,  the suggestion is serious.
> 
> Well, I can see the advantage of mimmicing the LSB, but for example
> lpr does not make sense without a printer, and setting up a printer
> takes configuring anyway so I don't feel it should be part of system


Here we can disagree, as the LSB defines lpr, it can well be just an
offline printer (print-to-file  setup) which can very well be configured
per default.

However, if we wish to include it in the basic profile or not is another
question.  I still think that doing so (or posix compliance, see thread
about bloat.)  could provide to be a benefit for the project.


//Spider


-- 
begin  .signature
This is a .signature virus! Please copy me into your .signature!
See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information.
end

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]