Re: Package priorities and dependencies.
> I don't see your point, and you seem to have missed mine.
My point is that there's no need for a package with no user-level
functionality of its own, such as a library, to have a priority
of its own.
If an Important package such as 'at' depends on libelf0 for whatever
dubious reason, libelf0 might be important. However, for systems
that don't install 'at,' libelf0 is pretty much useless, and its
classification as 'important' would be silly.
It makes more sense to me for libraries to not have any priority, or
more in line with your idea, have some mechanism in which the library
will inherit the highest priority of the selected packages that depend
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to email@example.com .