[2012-10-16 10:50:30 +1100] Gaetan Bisson: > [2012-10-15 20:48:46 +0200] Thomas Bächler: > > Am 15.10.2012 20:12, schrieb Daniel Wallace: > > >>> Makes sense. I'll add it to the 'base' group. > > >> > > >> Not needed as netcfg already depends on it. > > >> > > > netcfg isn't in base either > > > > > > > As I pointed out recently, it should be. > > Possibly, but regardless of what we end up doing with netcfg, > iproute2 should be in base in its own right.
I just saw you removed wpa_supplicant from the base group too... So if I understand your position correctly you are against individual network connectivity tools being in base, but CLI/GUI using them are fine?!? I mean, why not, but I thought base was supposed to be minimal. -- Gaetan
pgpna9rXK2keE.pgp
Description: PGP signature
