BB menu reorg and upstream packages

[Rich Felker]

On Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 04:59:51AM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> 
>   ok, i can appreciate (to some extent) mike f's point about the
> correlation to upstream packages (WRT to, say, "coreutils").  but that
> argument doesn't really hold WRT to other menu entries like "Linux
> System Utilities."  there's no such upstream package called *that*.
> 
>   part of my suggestion to reorg that whole menu system is that i
> think it's absurd to have situations like the following:
> 
> 	cat:		Coreutils
> 	more:		Linux System Utilities
> 	less:		Miscellaneous Utilities
> 
> 	nice:		Coreutils
> 	renice:		Process Utilities
> 
> 	od:		Coreutils
> 	hexdump:	Linux System Utilities
> 
>   i simply don't see the logic there, and i think it's more important
> to have a logically sane interface for the *user's* benefit than to
> try to stay compatible with upstream packages.

These are some very good examples of absurdities. In general the
situation isn't quite so bad though.

>   users don't *care* about upstream compatibility -- they want a menu

Are you sure? I think if you'll be using some upstream packages (for
tools where the BB version is insufficient) and some tools from BB,
it's useful to know what parts of BB replace which package.

Rich