Re: Slight example about Essential packages

[James Troup <J.J.Troup@comp.brad.ac.uk>]

[ I have no idea if I can post to the still-too-damn-closed deity
  mailing list, but the Cc is there ]

[ Oh, and because of the closed nature, please Cc: any replies to me ]

Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca> writes:

> I would say they are basically assuming that all packages marked
> essenital will be working whenever their package is to be installed.

" It is not necessary for other packages to declare any dependencies
  they have on other packages which are marked `Essential' (see
  below)."
                                Debian Policy (Version 2.3.0.1) 2.3.4

Yes, I am assuming that, because it says so in Policy.
\begin{bitch}The deity team have read that document, right?\end{bitch}

> This means every pacakge implicity Pre-Depends on -ALL- esential
> packages!

No, because then you couldn't upgrade an essential package and a
non-essential package at the same time; this is quite clearly not the
case.  We assume a Depend:s on them.

-- 
James