Re: Shouldn't "make replace" pull in pkgtools/pkg_tarup?

[Aleksey Cheusov <cheusov%tut.by@localhost>]

 >>> All seems to be pretty consistent:
 >>> 1. Package management tools.
 >>> 2. Packages.
 >>> 3. Optional helper (infrastructure) packages
 >>> (e.g. for building from the source).
 >> Optional? - yes. Helper? - yes. Infrustructure? - I think no.
 >> Infrustructure packages should be in 1).

> It probably mean "Optional Infrastructure" packages.

> Bootstrap packages should be kept minimam, because
> one of them is broken, failed to bootstrap.
IMHO this purpose results in unnecessary complications in pkgsrc
itself and bulk building software. Having exactly two categories for
packages can make both simplier. This thread gives me an idea to completely
remove dances around digest, pkg_tarup and checkperms from my distbb
and to force users to add all these to bootstrap tarball, that is
to emulate 2-category clear system.

Also, following your logic (minimalism) why packages required for
handling binaries (only pkg_install?) are not separated into an
individual category (bin-bootstrap?),
i.e. ./bootstrap --without-pkgs-for-building

-- 
Best regards, Aleksey Cheusov.