Re: Is the dependency rule distribution-wise?
On Sun, 21 Feb 1999, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Santiago Vila wrote:
> > Regarding slink, it is not released yet. Is there a reason why we should
> > not try to have correct priorities for slink? (You seem to imply that
> > priorities in slink should not be fixed, I would call *that* a "new
> > theory", because a lot of priorities have been already fixed since slink
> > was frozen).
>
> Unfortunately there is a reason for not doing this: Don't change too
> much in frozen. [...]
A priority change is not changing "too much", it does not require to
compile any package, and it does not make the package to be in another
section (i.e. another directory), so not even automatic upgrade scripts
would be confused about it.
In either case: do we agree that once we have decided not to recompile the
packages, this is a bug in the override file for slink, because priorities
are release-wise?
[ This is the real point, not whether the freeze is normal, deep, or solid ].
--
"408720d7a6f45805b0600f2701132317" (a truly random sig)
Reply to: