Subject: Re: Bug#3795: ae should not be essential

From: Christian Hudon <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 1996 10:52:40 -0700 (PDT)

On Fri, 19 Jul 1996, Ian Jackson wrote:

[snip]
> After all, if I install emacs or nvi I have no need of ae and the ae
> package shouldn't prevent me from using it.  Even if I have no other
> editor I can reinstall ae if I need to.

Isn't it that some of the packages that look at EDITOR fall back to ae if
there are problems with EDITOR?

Wouldn't that be good enough for essential?

   Christian

---

From: Ian Jackson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 96 01:14 BST

> there are problems with EDITOR?

I don't know.  I'm tempted to say that's probably not a very good
idea, but I can't back it up.  In any case ...

> Wouldn't that be good enough for essential?

No, absolutely not.  Essential makes it extremely hard for a user to
remove the package, and should only be used in cast-iron cases.

Ian.

---

From: "Brian C. White" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 22:10:36 -0400

> idea, but I can't back it up.  In any case ...

Dftp does, though it isn't a package, yet.

                                        Brian
                               ( [email-masked] )

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In theory, theory and practice are the same.  In practice, they're
not.