I second this proposal with the "all" amendment.
Julian
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, QMW, Univ. of London. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Debian GNU/Linux Developer, see http://www.debian.org/~jdg
On Wed, 10 Feb 1999, Santiago Vila wrote:
> Ok. To make it fully clear, I hereby change my earlier proposal to
> this one:
>
> extra
>
> "This contains all packages that conflict with others with required,
> important, standard or optional priorities, or are only likely to be
> useful if you alr
Ok. To make it fully clear, I hereby change my earlier proposal to
this one:
extra
"This contains all packages that conflict with others with required,
important, standard or optional priorities, or are only likely to be
useful if you already know what they are or have specialised requirements."
On Mon, 8 Feb 1999, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>
>
> I second this proposal.
>
> Santiago Vila wrote:
>
> > I propose that we clarify this by saying explicitly which are the
> > priorities higher than extra. The modified wording would be:
> >
> >
> > "This
I second this proposal
Matthew
--
Elen sila lumenn' omentielvo
Steward of the Cambridge Tolkien Society
Selwyn College Computer Support
http://www.cam.ac.uk/CambUniv/Societies/tolkien/
http://pick.sel.cam.ac.uk/
Debian GNU/Hurd - love at first byte
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
I second this proposal.
Santiago Vila wrote:
> I propose that we clarify this by saying explicitly which are the
> priorities higher than extra. The modified wording would be:
>
>
> "This contains packages that conflict with others with required,
> important
Package: debian-policy
There has been a long discussion about the exact meaning of the words
"higher priorities" in the definition of extra priority:
"This contains packages that conflict with others with higher priorities,
or are only likely to be useful if you already know what they are or have
7 matches
Mail list logo
