Re: Dummy packages and metapackages (call for consistency in the descriptions)

To: Debian Developers <debian-devel@lists.debian.org>
Subject: Re: Dummy packages and metapackages (call for consistency in the descriptions)
From: Andreas Tille <tillea@rki.de>
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 07:22:18 +0100 (CET)
Message-id: <[🔎] Pine.LNX.4.62.0511020720040.30816@wr-linux02>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20051101145802.GA23726@khazad-dum.debian.net>
References: <20051028214137.GA26570@marvin.casa> <20051029021844.GA16866@chistera.yi.org> <Pine.LNX.4.62.0510301722160.7996@wr-linux02> <20051031043512.GG9254@khazad-dum.debian.net> <Pine.LNX.4.62.0510312120170.23936@wr-linux02> <[🔎] 20051101134017.GA2727@khazad-dum.debian.net> <[🔎] Pine.LNX.4.62.0511011457030.21703@wr-linux02> <[🔎] 20051101145802.GA23726@khazad-dum.debian.net>

On Tue, 1 Nov 2005, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:

Well, I'd expect meta packages to have nothing on them


Why?  Was there any other definition than the link I posted that leads to
this assumption?

Kind regards

        Andreas.

--
http://fam-tille.de

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Dummy packages and metapackages (call for consistency in the descriptions)
  - From: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org>

References:
- Re: Dummy packages and metapackages (call for consistency in the descriptions)
  - From: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org>
- Re: Dummy packages and metapackages (call for consistency in the descriptions)
  - From: Andreas Tille <tillea@rki.de>
- Re: Dummy packages and metapackages (call for consistency in the descriptions)
  - From: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org>