Chris Adams (cmadams@xxxxxxxxxx) said: > Once upon a time, P@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <P@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said: > > 1. Does it really need it's own package? > > Couldn't you try to get it included in util-linux > > or some place like that? > > It was part of the split of the old kernel-utils. Glomming things > together to reduce package count is a bad idea. If it doesn't come with > util-linux (and why should hardlink be a part of util-linux; it isn't a > Linux specific utility), it shouldn't be in the util-linux RPM. However, it doesn't mean that trying to get it in upstream util-linux or coreutils isn't a bad idea. Bill
