[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: POSIX shell; bash ash pdksh & /bin/sh

>>"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. 

 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: