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

Re: dependency on base package adduser ?

On Tue, 2005-05-10 at 11:19 +0200, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> In article <[🔎] 20050510072206.GJ3763@asterix.konqueror.de> you wrote:
> > libc6 is not and may not be marked Essential, as the NM process taught me.
> > So its a bad example.
> Even if it is marked as essential, you have a versioned dependency, anyway.

But the point is, you cannot mark it essential; doing so is a severity
serious bug.  From the Policy, section 3.8:

   Since these packages cannot be easily removed (one has to specify an
   extra _force option_ to `dpkg' to do so), this flag must not be used
   unless absolutely necessary.  A shared library package must not be
   tagged `essential'; dependencies will prevent its premature removal,
   and we need to be able to remove it when it has been superseded.

Notice the the use of "must not"; that makes it severity serious.  Even
if there is no plan to change the name on GNU/Linux, that does not mean
that is the case on GNU/KFreeBSD, GNU/KNetBSD, or GNU/Hurd; that is why
glibc is not granted an exception.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: