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

Re: Conflicting packages not of extra priority.



On 7 Feb 1999, James Troup wrote:

> Since an Essential[1] package conflicting with another Essential
> package is the only way to replace an Essential package, I'd say so,
> yes.

Yes, but other packages conflicting with Essential packages is -bad- don't
do it. (remember the e2compr mess?)

> [1] For all occurrences of `Essential', read `Essential: yes', not the
> weirdo apt definition.

What weirdo apt definition?

Jason


Reply to: