Re: [RFC/dpkg PATCH] Introducing an relaxed-Essential-like "Important" field

2016-03-09 Thread Guillem Jover
Hi! On Wed, 2016-03-09 at 07:10:25 +, Niels Thykier wrote: > 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

Re: [RFC/dpkg PATCH] Introducing an relaxed-Essential-like "Important" field

2016-03-08 Thread Niels Thykier
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 >

[RFC/dpkg PATCH] Introducing an relaxed-Essential-like "Important" field

2016-03-05 Thread 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