On 10/8/19 2:20 PM, David C. Rankin wrote:
> On 10/06/2019 11:22 PM, Giancarlo Razzolini via arch-general wrote:
>> Yes, this was discussed over the years in several threads. The most recent
>> being [0].
>>
>> Lacking a kernel is mainly for container based environments. And some superfluous
>> packages were also removed from the group, like an editor.
>>
>> The necessary changes to the installation guide were already made [1].
>
> All of this seems like a lot of unnecessary shuffling to what has been a
> reliable base install for the past decade. Why on earth no simply create a
> 'base-container' group to provide the install for those desiring an install to
> support containers and leave the traditional base group alone. The lack
> cryptsetup, device-mapper, dhcpcd, mdadm, netctl, s-nail, vi and which in base
> seems to leave a 'base' install very unusable.
Because this is not about containers. There are tons of things in the
old base group which I don't want installed on my heavyweight X11
desktop which is used for media consumption.
I don't need netct (because networkmanager is love), s-nail (unuseful in
practice) or vi (symlink to vim) as a baseline fact.
I don't need cryptsetup or device-mapper if I'm not opting into an
encrypted filesystem, but this does not matter as I cannot get rid of
either one due to systemd performing shared library links to
libcryptsetup.so and therefore also having a depends+=('cryptsetup')
I do not need mdadm or lvm2, because I don't use RAID or lvm, so why do
you think my system is unusable without it? Note: in practice, both are
required by libblockdev, which means if you use udisks2 you have both
installed anyway.
--
Eli Schwartz
Bug Wrangler and Trusted User
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
