On Fri, 16 May 2003 12:40:12 -0500, Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Dave Love <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I was about to make one, and just came checking in the bug
>> archives... Check back later for a solution if you're interested,
>> when I've had time to submit it.
>>
>> Hear, hear on the substance of the report. I filed bugs a while
>> back about packages that rendered various things inoperable in
>> Emacs when they were removed and was referred to the policy
>> document, which puzzles me considerably. I was told to to use
>> `dpkg --purge' rather than `apt-get remove', which seems quite
>> unhelpful. (I'd already done that, but only after doing
>> non-trivial debugging to figure out the highly obscure error from
>> Emacs stuff that I've actually maintained.)
> I disagree with whoever told you to purge. IMO you should be able
> to --remove any of the add-on packages and not break emacs. I could
> add policy to that effect, but I'm surprised the maintainers
> wouldn't consider that obvious without explicit policy.
You should not need to create policy to enumerate bugs. Not
noticing that the package is removed is a bug; not preserving user
changes to files under /etc is a bug; we do not need to bloat policy
with a list of all possible bugs.
manoj
--
Correspondence Corollary: An experiment may be considered a success if
no more than half your data must be discarded to obtain correspondence
with your theory.
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
