On Tue, 10 Jul 2018 03:19:58 +0200 Michael Biebl <bi...@debian.org> wrote: > On Mon, 9 Jul 2018 22:03:06 +1000 Craig Small <csm...@debian.org> wrote: > > On Mon, 9 Jul 2018 at 19:38 Simon McVittie <s...@debian.org> wrote: > > > > > If we want pidof to be provided by a new procps-base instead of > > > sysvinit-utils for buster, maybe now is the time to start uploading > > > packages with that change to experimental? > > > > > I'd say if it is going to happen, it should happen now. > > > > Just wanted to say, that I had a look at the sysvinit-utils package > (again) the other day and wondered whether we could move > /sbin/killall5 and /sbin/fstab-decode into the (non-essential) > initscripts package, as according to codesearch there aren't any users > of those two binaries outside of initscripts itself (the notable > exception being open-iscsi, which has native service files, so this > wouldn't be a concern). > > The only blocker for moving /sbin/killall5 to initscripts is that > /bin/pidof is currently a symlink pointing at /sbin/killall5. > > So if you proceed with creating such a procps-base package, we could > make a follow-up upload for src:sysvinit, dropping /bin/pidof and moving > /sbin/killall5 and /sbin/fstab-decode
Following up on this: I'd love to see pidof built from the procps source package. What would it take to move forward with this?
