Bug#41232: debian-policy: [PROPOSAL] Build-time dependencies on binary packages
On Wed, Jul 14, 1999 at 05:59:26PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> The idea would be to provide a real list, but also the rationale from
> which the list is derived, so that whenever the list of build-essential
> packages change, we just update policy accordingly, without changing the
> spirit of it. How does this sound?
I don't like the idea of going through the Policy change procedure every
time we move something in or out of the required class. IMHO a list is good
to have, but I'd like more to see it as a separate document, with only
informative status and no weight of policy (so that when these two disagree,
it's the definition in policy which is followed).
> Would not be easier to specify just "Priority: required"
Possibly. I was under the impression that Essential: yes packages are
guaranteed to be there in every Debian system, regardless of their priority.
> on, say, Essential packages of extra priority not to be specified?
Do we have such packages in the current distributions?
--
%%% Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho % gaia@iki.fi % http://www.iki.fi/gaia/ %%%
"... memory leaks are quite acceptable in many applications ..."
(Bjarne Stroustrup, The Design and Evolution of C++, page 220)
Reply to: