On 14/11/23 11:11, Helmut Grohne wrote:
I welcome the effort in general. Like Andreas, I question whether having pidof remain essential is useful. A quick codesearch https://codesearch.debian.net/search?q=%5Cbpidof%5Cb&literal=0 suggests that we have less than 500 source packages that even mention it. Many uses are in test suites or documentation, so the final number will be lower still.
Last year Andreas and I had a quick look at what it would take to remove all pidof instances from maintscripts. In a couple of days we fixed a dozen packages.
This is our progress log: <https://salsa.debian.org/-/snippets/621>.In short, there are only 23 packages whose maintscripts assume the presence of pidof and that need to be fixed.
Regards, -- Gioele Barabucci