Re: Ignoring dependance on "important" packages?
>> "Adam" == Adam Di Carlo <adam@onshore.com> wrote:
Adam> The *second* you start messing around with apt or dpkg for
Adam> metapackages, most of the benefits of metapackages go away.
Adam> Furthermore, all the "improvements" which you seem to classify
Adam> as requirements, I would classify as unnecessary niceties.
I think I let my thoughts flow too much. The only requirement is the
task package flag. Any other thing are thought what a frondend can do
if it knows the extra semantics.
Well, let's just do usual package and see how well this works (aka how
many users complain and file bugs :-).
Someone said on debian-devel, that he expected from a task package,
that all dependant packages are removed, if he removes the task
package. Interesting, and he has a point.
Defining tasks through ordniary packages _is_ a hack. It should be
left to the frontend, as forming package supersets for easier handling
is really their task. Therefore I hope we will be able to place a
package in more than one categorie sometime.
But in the meantime, we need something now, so let's just hack away.
Ciao,
Martin
Reply to: