On 25 April 2015 at 20:18, Sam Stuewe <halosghost@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 08:10:57PM +0200, Maarten de Vries wrote: > > I would say an editor is part of the bare minimum for any system. You > > can't do much on a system without an editor (of course you can still edit > > files using some basic tools that don't qualify as editors, but that's > > besides the point). > I don't actually agree. Editing configs post install is not required for > a bootable install (as made obvious by the fact that you can boot to > it). Besides, once a user has booted, they can just install whatever > editor they so choose anyway. > Fair enough, if you define minimal as "it can boot", then you don't need an editor. I would interpret the "system" part in "a minimal booting system" as a system that can perform some basic tasks like editing files though. > They are two separate things already. The installation media comes with > > wpa_supplicant for one. > Right. I'm not actually arguing for wpa_supplicant's inclusion in > `base`, just pointing out that things like, `netctl` (and imho, the > variety of text editors) might not make sense either if we assume `base` > is exclusively for a bootable install. > Right, I don't really see a point in having netctl in base either, personally. I don't really mind either though. I do see a point for an editor in there. Then again, it's all very subjective anyway. > > Kinds regards, > And the same to you. > And you ;) Kind regards, Maarten
