On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 02:12:59AM +0100, Andreas Henriksson wrote: > On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 01:33:49AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 01:24:31AM +0100, Andreas Henriksson wrote: > > > I expect you to take care of this bug and others if you're now going to > > > pretent to maintain this package! > > > > You demand a change that requires a lot of work all around the archive, > > I've already proven this is a bullshit excuse. Read the actual bug > report content.
I'm refusing to discuss that part until you calm down and stop throwing content-less insults. > > without providing any reason _why_. > > Section 3.8 can be read here: > https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-binary.html#essential-packages The "Essential" tag has three purposes: 1. must work while unpacked but unconfigured 2. doesn't require an explicit dependency 3. works in postrm purge What's wanted here is: > See also third paragraph of 3.5. # Packages are not required to declare any dependencies they have on other # packages which are marked Essential (see below), and should not do so # unless they depend on a particular version of that package. Without that, we'd need to add explicit dependencies everywhere. No one wants multi-page init or .service scripts when a short init-d-script will suffice. Making that harder would be a disservice. Meow! -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ in the beginning was the boot and root floppies and they were good. ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ -- <willmore> on #linux-sunxi ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀
