Re: virtual packages
On May 25, Craig Sanders wrote
> On Sun, 25 May 1997, Christian Schwarz wrote:
> > I fully agree to what Manoj said. Since the dotfile generator will
> > probably get widely used by other packages we should put this package on
> > our list of "public virtual packages".
> > Since I maintain this list, I suggest the following addition to section
> > "Miscellaneous":
> > dotfile-module Anything that provides a module for the dotfile
> > generator
> > Does someone have objections?
> No objections, just a query:
> what will this actually achieve?
> Will dselect automatically select new packages providing dotfile-module
> when they appear?
> As far as I know, it won't - at least not if dotfile only Suggests
> dotfile-module.....and even if it does do it for Recommends, the
> behaviour of Recommends is obnoxious enough that it should NOT be used
> in this situation.
Whether it depends, recommends or suggests dotfile-module, dselect would still
be satisfied when just one module is selected, so when new modules appear they
won't be selected automatically. This is much easier to do than make a depends
line look like this:
Depends: dotfile-bash | dotfile-fvwm2 | dotfile-tcsh etc.
I think dotfile should depend on dotfile-module, since it's practically useless
without it. I could be convinced to only recommend it, but as Craig pointed
out, dselect does not treat Recommends any differently than it does Depends.
> the individual dotfile-modules should Depend upon dotfile
> for the initial install of dotfile, i can't see much benefit at all in
> having dotfile Suggest dotfile-module.
Proudly running Debian Linux! Linux vs. Windows is a no-Win situation....
Igor Grobman firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org .