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

Re: Priority of libsasl2 in etch



Roberto C. Sánchez a écrit :

On Tue, Mar 27, 2007 at 11:23:57PM -0400, Philippe Cloutier wrote:
Santiago Vila a écrit :

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?).

(Yes)
I requested the priority of an important package to be downgraded to standard recently and Don Armstrong suggested to drop it since it made no difference anyway (as you say, it doesn't change most/all CD images). That was a non-dummy package which should stay in the archive in the foreseeable future. I'm sure that downgrading libsasl2's priority to standard is a waste of time.

Would you say the same about the documentation package?  Didn't someone
just recently complain that the -doc package's important priority caused
to be included on the netinst image?  Perhaps I am remembering
incorrectly.

Regards,

-Roberto

The doc package isn't the same thing since downgrading to optional has a real impact. Anyway, see http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=405089 (already fixed by jvw).



Reply to: