[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.


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: