Re: Package with optional priority depending on extra packages
"Joona Kiiski" <email@example.com> writes:
> I just found out that piuparts (priority optional) depends on
> debootstrap (priority extra) This is against debian policy (section
> 2.5), so I reported bug #477634 with severity serious.
> However, soon the severity was lowered to minor by maintainer with a
> comment: "priority optional and priority extra should probably be
> merged in this regard". Minor severity in BTS in my experience often
> means "not going to fix this soon or maybe ever".
Priority inversion, while a Policy violation, is not considered an RC
bug. ftpmaster can fix this globally before the release if desired; the
package priorities in their control files are only a hint.
> I'm not a DD/DM (and maybe never will be) and not in a position to
> advise any of you, but I just want you to consider the fact that if you
> allow optional packages freely depend on extra packages, it is possible
> that you'll end up in situation where optional packages conflict with
> each other (which under Morphy's law will have disastrous effects in
I think these are unrelated. We get optional packages that conflict on
each other all the time even without priority inversion.
Russ Allbery (firstname.lastname@example.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>