From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me@tobias.gr>
Subject: Re: drop net-tools from %base-packages?
Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2020 22:47:32 +0100
Message-ID: <87y2uhd3ij.fsf@nckx>
References: <877e2bm76p.fsf@latte.josefsson.org> <87o8vedqe2.fsf@gnu.org>
 <87k1611w93.fsf@devup.no>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";
 micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:41638)
 by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
 (envelope-from <me@tobias.gr>) id 1ipJB8-0000vu-KB
 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 08 Jan 2020 16:47:51 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
 (envelope-from <me@tobias.gr>) id 1ipJB6-00029K-A7
 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 08 Jan 2020 16:47:49 -0500
In-reply-to: <87k1611w93.fsf@devup.no>
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
 <guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
 <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
 <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-devel"
 <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org>
To: guix-devel@gnu.org
Cc: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@gnu.org>, Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org>

--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

My opinion's bit-identical to Marius's.

Marius Bakke =E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A
> I've finally gotten used to 'ss' to the point where I reach for=20
> it
> before 'netstat'.  It's also shorter to type, like 'ip r' vs=20
> 'route'.
>
>> Any objections, people?  If not let=E2=80=99s do that.
>
> None from me, I've considered this in the past too.

Kind regards,

T G-R

--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=8qOh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-=-=--