On Fri, 27 Nov 2015, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> Transitioning from one essential package to another involves some
> packages depending on them, which decide this matter – which is your
No, that cannot be, unversioned Depends on Essential packages
are a Policy violation.
Though I admittedly
Control: reopen -1
Control: tags -1 - pending
Control: severity -1 wishlist
Control: retitle -1 deal with mutually-exclusive essential package sets
# wrong bug number in commit message…
On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 11:43:43AM +0100, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> I just got upgraded…
> | Unpacking apt (1.1)
On Fri, 27 Nov 2015, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> Essentials have to be installed, so you just can't have mutually-
> exclusive essentials in any supportable capacity.
Of course Essentials have to be installed, but even in
Debian it’s possible to have transitions of Essential
packages e.g. from
On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 05:18:13PM +0100, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Nov 2015, David Kalnischkies wrote:
>
> > Essentials have to be installed, so you just can't have mutually-
> > exclusive essentials in any supportable capacity.
>
> Of course Essentials have to be installed, but even
Package: apt
Version: 1.1
Severity: normal
I just got upgraded…
| Unpacking apt (1.1) over (1.0.10.2) ...
… and now, a dist-upgrade has a regression.
Background story: I created a package dash-mksh that contains
a (versioned, due to the versioned dependency of bash on dash)
Provides for dash,
5 matches
Mail list logo
