Bug#758234: [PATCH] Remove priority "extra", make all corresponding packages priority "optional"
Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> writes:
> Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
>> Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> writes:
>>> In some cases, it can change maintenance decisions.
>>
>> Does this differ much from packages being picked up by other commonly
>> installed software? Say GNOME starting to depend on my small library
>> which suddenly raises from ~100 to 50000+ reported installations?
>
> In the case of "Priority: required", yes. The pseudo-essential part
> has to continue to function during an upgrade before dependencies are
> configured and "postinst upgrade" runs.
That's related to being (pseudo-)essential and not to priority. Package
of Priority: required do not have to be pseudo-essential, but packages
of lower priority can be pseudo-essential:
All init alternatives are pseudo-essential, but most are Priority:
extra. (Totally unrelated I think init systems should not be
essential...)
Note that there is no automated way to determine what packages are
pseudo-essential: an essential package (pre-)depending is neither a
sufficient nor necessary condition.
Not sufficient: Package a-essential can Depends: b, but b is not
required for the essential parts of a-essential.
Not necessary: Package a-essential can Depends: b for its essential
functionality, but b-alternative can divert that part of b making
b-alternative pseudo-essential (plus the packages b-alternative depends
on for the parts a-essential needs from b-alternative).
> In the case of "Priority: important" and "standard", the main changes
> are (1) having to worry more about the package's installed size and
> (2) splitting the package into more pieces or variants when parts
> depend on packages some users don't want (e.g. X).
(2) seems to be a common case for all packages, unrelated to their
priority.
Ansgar
Reply to: