Julian Andres Klode: > Since a few years, APT supports an "Important" field that is similar > to Essential, but without the requirement for those packages to be > installed (they just need to remain installed) and the ordering > constraints. Previously, it was already an alias for Essential in > APT. > > I relaxed the meaning a few years ago to make it suitable for use > on site-specific or system-specific configuration meta packages. > > I propose to make this field official and add support to dpkg > for it, as there are new use cases for it, like init systems, > e2fsprogs, and mount - packages that are not needed on all > systems (like chroots), but once installed should probably > remain installed. > > I attached a patch to add support for dpkg, it's also discussed > in a spec in the wiki. > > I'd like some feedback. > > References: > > [1] https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Dpkg/Spec/ImportantField >
Hi, I think the concept is good and and I like how it might be used to reduce the essential set. My personal minor concern is that "Important" might become ambiguous since we also have a Priority labelled important[1]. Thanks, ~Niels [1] https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive.html#s-priorities
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
