On Fri, 7 Dec 2007 00:01:43 +1000, Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Haven't we more or less already moved away from priorities as meaning
> anything particularly important? We have:
> * required/essential -- stuff that can't be removed: libc, dpkg,etc
Packages which are required to be present for the packaging
system to be able to install additional packages. This means dpkg and
everything dpkg itself needs; if these packages are gone, the system
can't repair itself, and can not move to a more tenable state.
> * important -- the rest of base, stuff necessary to bootstrap
> and recover a usable and useful system
The subset of the OS required to boot and be able to install
further packages. Note that just required packages might not constitue
a bootable system.
> * standard -- a minimal collection of useful stuff we'd like to
> see on every Debian system
> optional -- all the good software in the world
> extra -- obscure stuff
If we are removing the invariant that everything in optional
should not conflict with anything else in optional, and extra is where
the conflicing packages go, is there any reason to retain extra as a
distinct section?
> I'm not sure if there's any point to continuing to try to make sure
> that nothing >= optional conflicts with anything else >= optional.
Hmm. Can you elaborate on this, please? Is it because it is too
hard to achieve this? Or you think this is something unattainable even
in theory? It is a nice invariant, if only we could get it to hold for
Debian.
manoj
--
Hacking's just another word for nothing left to kludge.
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
