[Santiago Vila] > I'm thinking about adding lsb_release to base-files, but that will > be in either case after the dust of umask has settle down...
Why? I fail to see the advantage, and only see problems for those needing/wanting one like Debian Edu. It is obviously not needed at the moment, as lsb_release prints the correct debian value: % lsb_release -a No LSB modules are available. Distributor ID: Debian Description: Debian GNU/Linux unstable (sid) Release: unstable Codename: sid % > I've got some questions: > > * Should I add a Replaces: debian-edu-config (>= someversion) if/when > doing so? I have no idea how we should handle it, without forcing Debian Edu to no longer provide any clue about Debian Edu configuration being enabled. > * What will you do in debian-edu-config if/when base-files includes the > file /etc/lsb_release? I see the current file has this: > > DISTRIB_DESCRIPTION="DebianEdu/Skolelinux" > > which I suppose is not suitable for base-files. Yeah. I have no idea what we will have to do. Perhaps we just give up and drop it, perhaps we edit the file using cfengine rules, or perhaps something else. :) > * Is debian-edu-config the only package in squeeze currently > containing /etc/lsb_release or should I make a list of them first? I do not know, but according to apt-file search, we are the only one in Sid: % apt-file search /etc/lsb-release debian-edu-config: /etc/lsb-release % Happy hacking, -- Petter Reinholdtsen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
