On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 09:23:30PM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: > On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 08:48:12PM +0200, Julian Andres Klode wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 07:29:44PM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: > > > When trying to remove an Important:yes package, the message claims it's > > > essential: > > > Well, it sort of is. Not in the "Essential: yes" sense, but in a broader > > sense. > > My point is, the word "essential" has a specific meaning, so reusing it for > something only somewhat similar is bound to cause confusion -- at the least, > make the user think he's dealing with an actually Essential package.
The same applies to important, which is the main reason everyone wants a different name :/ (it's a historic artefact that I just re-used, it used to mean the same as Essential in early APT versions; now it's basically: Do not remove if already installed). > > There's a difference between needing the highest level of confirmation known > to apt and something dpkg doesn't even require confirmation for. > > > we have not decided on an official name for that field, the current one is > > just a very old one. > > In that case, perhaps using it in packages is premature? Not really, we're (I am) supporting it. It's mostly a matter of getting dpkg to support it for extra safety that an official field would bring (dpkg would then require --force-remove-somethinglikeessential to remove it). Main use case so far was local system configuration meta packages, but init systems and bootloaders seem like a very good thing as well. Basically anything that should not be removed normally once installed. > > > So, no idea what to do here. > > Hmm, if you're still debating what Important should do (and even its very > name), making big changes here might indeed be a waste of effort because of > the risk of having to do them again. Thus, what about changing just the > message for now? An interface for overriding it can wait until you're happy > with the specs. I'm not sure what you mean with overriding it - my problem is to think of a more useful message... -- Debian Developer - deb.li/jak | jak-linux.org - free software dev When replying, only quote what is necessary, and write each reply directly below the part(s) it pertains to (`inline'). Thank you.
