Re: Conflicting packages not of extra priority.
On 7 Feb 1999, James Troup wrote:
> Santiago Vila <email@example.com> writes:
> > According to your interpretation, conflicting packages which are
> > both required, or both important, are allowed, right? :-)
> Since an Essential package conflicting with another Essential
> package is the only way to replace an Essential package, I'd say so,
I wouldn't say so. The essential flag does not imply required priority.
We can have two conflicting essential packages, but only one of them is
of required priority.
"fba142772e1969bede2108f2c17ac636" (a truly random sig)