Re: Priority of libsasl2 in etch
On Sun, 25 Mar 2007, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 25, 2007 at 03:12:27PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > # dpkg -s libsasl2
> > Package: libsasl2
> > Status: install ok installed
> > Priority: important
> > Section: libs
> > Installed-Size: 72
> > Maintainer: Debian Cyrus SASL Team <pkg-cyrus-sasl2-debian-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org>
> > Architecture: i386
> > Source: cyrus-sasl2
> > Version: 2.1.22.dfsg1-8
> > Depends: libsasl2-2 (= 2.1.22.dfsg1-8)
> > Description: Authentication abstraction library
> > This is a transitional dummy package. If nothing depends on it, this
> > package can be safely removed.
>
> > If it's a dummy package, why is it "important", and "Section: libs"?
> > Could we please change this to "optional" and "oldlibs" before the release?
>
> Given that it is a dummy package, the cost of keeping it at 'important' for
> now IMHO doesn't outweigh the risk of changing it a week before release.
Hmm, it's not as if we didn't have any knowledge about what debian-installer
does and how it chooses the packages to install, or how we do generate
our install images.
The risk of downgrading libsasl2 to optional is that it may end up
being missing from install CDs (who are made based on priorities,
among other things) but either debian-installer might still want to
install it, or the user might want to install a package which still
depends on it, as "apt-cache rdepends libsasl2" is not empty.
I agree that it's a little bit late for this, but we could downgrade
to standard at least, and it would still be present on install CDs
(we have a policy of including all standard and above packages in
netinst and CD images, don't we?).
Regarding the section, moving to oldlibs should not break anything.
People will appreciate that deborphan does what it's supposed to do.
Could we please consider the section at least?
It's not as if we didn't have any testers installing new Debian
systems everyday using the daily generated images.
Thanks.
Reply to: