Package priorities and dependencies.

[Dale Scheetz <dwarf@polaris.net>]

I have been working on a prototype of a system to allow "Custom Systems"
that can be installed "simply" with dselect. The approach has been to make
a subdirectory, containing links into the archive for the packages that
are needed by the "Custom System". The technique is working out fine, but
I have discovered some problems with the distribution as a result of my
experiments.

I built one subdirectory (called importnt for DOS sake) containing links
to all the packages is bo with the priority "important". This seemed like
a good "foundation" to build on. Select subsets of "standard" can produce
a system taylored for size and functionality.

Two packages in the list of "important" refused to install because they
declared (correctly) their dependence upon packages of lower priority.

	at	depends on	libelf0		priority: optional
	groff	depends on	libg++27	priority: standard

It seems to me that packages of any priority level should not be dependent
upon packages of lower priority. This doesn't mean that at and groff
should be removed from important. It does tell me that libelf0 and
libg++27 should be priority: important, because they have important
packages that depend on them.

This tells me that libelf0 and libg++27 should have their priority field
changed to "important".

Does this make sense to anyone but me?

Dwarf
-- 
_-_-_-_-_-_-                                          _-_-_-_-_-_-_-

aka   Dale Scheetz                   Phone:   1 (904) 656-9769
      Flexible Software              11000 McCrackin Road
      e-mail:  dwarf@polaris.net     Tallahassee, FL  32308

_-_-_-_-_-_- If you don't see what you want, just ask _-_-_-_-_-_-_-


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .