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

Re: virtual packages

On May 25, Christian Schwarz wrote
> > 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.  
> I was thinking about "Suggests: dotfile-module". This has a few
> advantages:
> - The first time some selects "dotfile-gen" (or whatever it's called)
> dselect automatically suggests to include a module. So if one don't know
> this package, one get the hint to include a module.
> - If new module packages appear, the user probably already knows about the
> dotfile generator, so he/she doesn't need such a hint. (The package is
> listed under "new available packages"--this should be enough.)
> - Perhaps some sysadmins have created their own dotfile modules for local
> use only, so they probably don't want to install any of your module
> packages. If dotfile-gen would depend or recommend them, he/she would have
> to install one of the module packages just to get dselect shutting up.
> So what's the problem of dotfile-gen suggesting dotfile-module?

ok, I am convinced.  Looks like Suggests would be the best in this case.

Proudly running Debian Linux! Linux vs. Windows is a no-Win situation....
Igor Grobman           igor@debian.org                 igor@digicron.com 

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 .

Reply to: