Re: POSIX shell; bash ash pdksh & /bin/sh
>>"Santiago" == Santiago Vila <email@example.com> 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
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.
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 <firstname.lastname@example.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 email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org