Bug#440242: closed by "Eugene V. Lyubimkin" <jackyf.devel@gmail.com> (closing #440242)

[Zefram <zefram@fysh.org>]

reopen 440242
thanks

Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote:
>Zefram wrote:
>> There's no indication here that it might remove requested packages.
>Requested? 'dist-upgrade' command takes no additional arguments, see synopsis.

I meant "requested" in the sense that I had earlier (months earlier)
explicitly requested to install the package, because I wanted to
(directly) use the facilities it provides.  As opposed to the package
having been installed just to satisfy a dependency.

I also fail to see how the removal of xlockmore qualifies as an "expense"
of "upgrading the most important packages".  It doesn't have any declared
conflicts.  Its removal was gratuitous.

-zefram