Tyler MacDonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I'm playing paranoid here, but why don't you want to declare > dependencies on essential packages?
The short answer is "because Policy 3.5 says they shouldn't." I'm not positive about the exact rationale, though. > If the package ceases to be Essential at some point in the future, some > non-essential packages may still need it's functionality, but without > this relationship being tracked, the package could easily disappear. It's fairly unlikely that anything currently included in Essential will ever be dropped from Essential in the future, at least without a lot of warning and mass bug-filing on the packages that need to add dependencies. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
