On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 11:28:43AM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote: > * Branden Robinson (branden@debian.org) [040316 10:55]: > > On Sun, Mar 14, 2004 at 11:21:59PM +0100, Jakob Bohm wrote: > > > However, I still see no in band mechanism in the packaging system > > > whereby aptitude or any other tool can determine if a package > > > priority is assigned to satisfy assertion [1] or because the > > > package in and of itself is considered a necessary part of the > > > functionality promised by that priority level. That should > > > affect the quality of any aptitude default settings of the M > > > flag. > > > I do agree that this information should be encoded someplace. > > > > Anyone got any proposals? > > Adjust the priorities as it was proposed? I mean apart from that. :) -- G. Branden Robinson | Don't use nuclear weapons to Debian GNU/Linux | troubleshoot faults. branden@debian.org | -- US Air Force Instruction 91-111 http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature