Re: POSIX shell; bash ash pdksh & /bin/sh
Hi,
>>"Santiago" == Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es> writes:
Santiago> On Wed, 5 Aug 1998, Buddha Buck wrote:
>>
>> So all reference to essential packages (except for possibly sec.2.3.7)
>> only refer to the fact that other packages don't have to depend on them.
Santiago> Yes, because they are always on the system. But all those
Santiago> facts are not a *definition* of essential but instead a set
Santiago> of *properties* an essential package has when it is
Santiago> essential. Do not confuse the rationale for making a
Santiago> package essential with the properties it has when it is
Santiago> essential.
That's not all the tale. Yes, but the properties assigned to
an essential package are such that reversing the flag, and making the
package non-essential, entails effort (maybe a lot), and should only
be undertaken for compeelling reasons. The fact that we are having
this passionate debate indicates that the reasons have not been as
compelling as desired.
manoj
--
These days the necessities of life cost you about three times what
they used to, and half the time they aren't even fit to drink.
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@acm.org> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: