On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 06:25:14PM +0200, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote: > Manoj Srivastava wrote: >> Hi, >> On Fri, 02 May 2008 17:45:30 +0200, Carl Fürstenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> said:
>>> Policy section 3.8, about essential packages, doesn't explain when/why >>> essential is neccessary, only that it should not be essential if it's >>> not necessary. >> My understanding is that a package is Essential if without it is >> impossible to install any more packages to the system -- that is, the >> package is required for proper functioning of dpkg. If my understanding >> is correct, it should be easy to add in a line about when packages can >> be made Essential. > In addition "Essential" is also used not full dependencies with > "obvious" packages. (Policy 3.5) This is not part of the rationale for a package's inclusion in Essential, it's an effect of a package's inclusion in Essential. Packages should only be in the Essential set if they have to be there to guarantee the operation of dpkg. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
