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

Re: Bug#50832: AMENDMENT] Clarify meaning of Essential: yes

On Fri, Dec 10, 1999 at 02:06:47AM -0800, Chris Waters wrote:
> Furthermore, it occurs to me that the problem isn't just essential
> packages.  If libc6 fails to work during an upgrade, we're equally bad
> off, but libc6 isn't essential.  So, the proposal is not only
> ambiguous and redundant, but misdirected as well.  Only the fact that
> it's harmless (because it's redundant) keeps me from formally
> objecting.  :-)


How about coming up with something better then?



Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG encrypted mail preferred.

 ``The thing is: trying to be too generic is EVIL. It's stupid, it 
        results in slower code, and it results in more bugs.''
                                        -- Linus Torvalds

Attachment: pgpfxsSaIf3eC.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: