[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Tasks policy

On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 11:42:49AM -0400, Mark Eichin wrote:
> err, does this break the use of tasks with apt-get later on?  I've
> found it very useful to do (for example) "apt-get install task-x-window-system"

Possibly. task-x-window-system isn't really the greatest example of a task,

You can always run tasksel, select the task, and go "Ok", instead of using
"apt-get install ..." though. Making "tasksel install server-dns" just go
ahead and install the task, bypassing the UI, would be fairly simple too.

> Does it not also make it a lot harder to update and experiment with tasks?

Not really: the Task: headers will be done via overrides, probably sourced
from boot-floppies CVS.

> (Couldn't this also be handled by dropping non-critical task deps to
> "recommends" or something like that, and an apt-get option to "try to
> get the recommends too"?)

In theory it could. In practice, it suffers from recommends being more
appropriately handled in a frontend rather than a lowlevel tool like
apt-get (to paraphrase, barely, Jason's take on apt-get supporting
recommends), and also from the same problems using depends: does: if I
remove a package from the task, the whole task breaks, rather than just
politely including one less package.

This was discussed in a fair degree of depth shortly after potato was
released, btw. Have a look at the thread on -devel which included:


Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

``_Any_ increase in interface difficulty, in exchange for a benefit you
  do not understand, cannot perceive, or don't care about, is too much.''
                      -- John S. Novak, III (The Humblest Man on the Net)

Attachment: pgpFMhCijkGyt.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: