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

Re: Packages file [WAS: Splitting Packages]



On Mon, 1 Apr 2002, Otto Wyss wrote:
> > > I like this since it solves the same purpose, a separate
> > > essiential line isn't necessary.
> >
> > Well, no. The debian-policy explains the difference, read Section 2.2
> > ("Priorities") and Section 2.3.7 ("Essential packages") to find out.
>
> I don't see any problem to tag a package with "Priority: Essential"
> instead tag it with a separate line "Essential: Yes"!  Policy can be
> followed in both way.

Assuming that essential packages are always packages with the priority
required, you are right ;) In practice, that's the case, in theory that's
nowhere stated within policy.

But since priority and essential is something different in concept I would
rather stick to the existing solution. Let alone the fact that the
"Essential:" tag applies to only 24 Packages at the moment, so removing
that tag wouldn't result in much gain besides confusion for the user.

Jens

--
ruehmkorf at informatik dot uni hyphen koeln dot de


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org



Reply to: