Bug#983304: please document "Protected" field
Source: debian-policy
Version: 4.5.1.0
Severity: wishlist
In Julian Andres Klode's blog I've [1] glimpsed:
> New features
> [...]
> The Protected field is now supported. It replaces the previous Important
> field and is like Essential, but only for installed packages (some minor
> more differences maybe in terms of ordering the installs).
So I've tried to find out what the "Protected" field is for. The only
info about it that I could find is from `man 1 dpkg`:
> Protected packages contain mostly important system boot infrastructure.
> Removing them might cause the whole system to be unable to boot, so use
> with caution.
That seems a bit vague and sparse.
Is there maybe more rigid information for what *exactly* the "Protected"
field should and will be used?
Either way, if there's a new control field, then I think it should get
documented in the `debian-policy`?
Thanks,
*t
[1] https://blog.jak-linux.org/2021/02/18/apt-2.2/
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 10.8
APT prefers stable
APT policy: (500, 'stable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386
Kernel: Linux 4.19.0-13-amd64 (SMP w/8 CPU cores)
Kernel taint flags: TAINT_WARN, TAINT_OOT_MODULE, TAINT_UNSIGNED_MODULE
Locale: LANG=de_CH.utf8, LC_CTYPE=de_CH.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE=de_CH:de (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
LSM: AppArmor: enabled
Reply to: