Since RouterOS 13 there are separate routeros and wireless packages.
Wireless is automatically installed on hEX router as well despite it has no wireless.
Why?
Can I safely uninstall it?
Thanks

Yes, you can. It is installed in case you want to run CAPsMAN. But, if that is not your case of use, it is safe to remove it.

Regards.

Yes, you can just uninstall it

Thanks,
Still the other question remains: why the installer does not recognize that this HW is without wireless? Why is it installed?

This question is answered many times. It is to manage wireless devices with CAPsMAN. This function was always there

Thanks.
Well, this is not a clear answer for the why for me, but of course one can live with it.

The installer doesn't analyze actual configuration of the device hence it doesn't know whether capsman functionality, included in now separate package wireless, is needed or not. To be on safe side the package is installed even though device doesn't have wireless hardware.

Ok, than the next question: why the installer does not analize the HW, but again, understood and accepted

Because installer is a very simple one ... in most ROS versions (up and including 7.11 and 7.13 and later) it simply downloads and installs the very same packages as already installed. MT went all overboard with installer in 7.12 which knows the following 3 cases:

1. wifiwave2 installed and device is one of ax devices -> install wifi-qcom instead of wifiwave2
2. wifiwave2 installed and device is one of ac devices -> install wifi-qcom-ac instead of wifiwave2
3. wifiwave2 not installed -> install additional wireless package

Ok, than why not
4) device families w/o wireless -> uninstall any wireless package

See my post #7 above.

You say: "and device is one of ax/ac devices" - It means it do analyses the type of device, doesn't it

It might have model names hard coded (so it might not perform hardware detection routines). And it's different than your case: if device had wifiwave2 installed previously, then legacy wireless (was part of core package back in time) was disabled ... hence legacy capsman could not be in use (and this possibility is, as explained more than once, the reason to install legacy wireless package on "the rest of devices").

I'll end my discussion in this thread, it doesn't seem to lead anywhere.

The package also is installed on a CRS (=SWITCH) device.
Totally useless for 99% of those devices.

Just uninstall it and be done with it.
As said by mkx, it doesn't bring any added value to keep on asking why.

There was this one user this year who insisted to run a capsman server on a CRS though

There was this one user this year who insisted to run a capsman server on a CRS though

As a person who uses a hAP ac2 as a glorified switch/firewall with a CAPsMAN server, I can relate

Ok, than why not
4) device families w/o wireless -> uninstall any wireless package

[Legacy] CAPsMAN — which CONTROLS access points — was always an included feature & does not require an hardware, since it's a controller. Recently, CAPsMAN moved to the wireless package, but [Legacy] CAPsMAN still remains a default feature... by install wireless package by default which contains it now. Only difference now is you can remove CAPsMAN by REMOVING the wireless package.

There no way for install to know if someone might need the SERVER (e.g. CAPsMAN) for controlling Wi-Fi, so no hardware is not an indicator if CAPsMAN might be needed. But the WHY here is that changing what features are default in point releases causes issues for upgrade or new install where someone expect it to be there.

Thank you for the explanation!