Re: Conflicting packages not of extra priority.
On 7 Feb 1999, James Troup wrote:
> Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es> writes:
>
> > According to your interpretation, conflicting packages which are
> > both required, or both important, are allowed, right? :-)
>
> Since an Essential[1] package conflicting with another Essential
> package is the only way to replace an Essential package, I'd say so,
> yes.
I wouldn't say so. The essential flag does not imply required priority.
We can have two conflicting essential packages, but only one of them is
of required priority.
--
"fba142772e1969bede2108f2c17ac636" (a truly random sig)
Reply to: