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

Re: New ispell packages - proposals

On Tue, 29 Aug 1995, James A. Robinson wrote:

> > Each dictionary package provides an Ispell_Dictionary virtual package.  
> > Now then, the problem is that of circular dependencies again.  Ideally, 
> > ispell should depend on an Ispell_Dictionary, but then the dictionaries 
> > should depend on ispell.  Chicken or egg situation...  It is my 
> > understanding that we don't have a mechanism for handling these mutually 
> > dependent packages, or do we?
> I thought Virtual Packages were designed to handle cases like this.  I
> had assumed it would go something like:
> ispell:
> 	Virtual-Recommended: ispell-dictionary
> ibritish:
> 	Depends: ispell
> 	Virtual-Provides: ispell-dictionary

I was thinking of making ispell depend on a dictionary, not recommending 
one.  Recommending will certainly solve the dpkg problem, but will leave 
the user with the possible situation of having ispell binaries with no 

I have always taken the recommended line to be just that, ie. 
functionality of a package does not depend on the recommended packages 
being installed.


Reply to: