Comment 18 for bug 1876139

> From the changelog you dropped fdisk to avoid having it in chroots and
> squashfs'.

Could there not be a chroot-essential set

> But given that fdisk is no longer part of the essential set, packages that
> invoke it should also be fixed to declare a dependency on it.

When do consumers of the essential set get to participate in the discussion of
what is or is NOT considered essential. This pattern has been repeated many
times over the many years and Server, specifically cloud-init team somehow is
out of the loop on these decision discussions. I'd like to really understand
what mailing-list, group, or team meeting that we're not part of so we can
avoid this after-the-fact discussion about how we got here.

> +1 on packages explicitly declaring a dependency.

I'll repeat that these sorts of changes are a lot easier to do if we know it's
coming. We never missed any of the ubuntu-devel emails around python2/3
transitions, or ssl changes, or rebuilds of the archive etc ... I'd also
like to point out that this additional dependency is only needed when changes
to packages subdivide portions of the package in ways that existing packages
don't know about. Cloud-init clearly depended on cloud-guest-utils which
clearly depended on util-linux. I don't think anyone anticipated that fdisk
and gdisk would bet pulled out into subpackages... what's next? dmesg? more?
mkfs ?

> Is this being worked for cloud-utils?

Scott has put up the change in a paste and we'll get this this pushed.