Re: Package priorities and dependencies.
On Sun, 15 Jun 1997, Clint Adams wrote:
> > Does this make sense to anyone but me?
> It seems unnecessary for shared libraries to have priorities if they're
> useless without programs which depend upon them.
I don't see your point, and you seem to have missed mine.
I was trying to point out that allowing dependencies to reach outside a
packages priority has the potential to cause problems, specificly when
package intallation is organized using the priority levels (as has been
suggested in the past as a solution to several packaging problems)
Once the base system (required packages) is installed, all the important
packages should be capable of installation, followed by all standard,
etc... The two dependencies I sited for the priority group important are a
case in point.
aka Dale Scheetz Phone: 1 (904) 656-9769
Flexible Software 11000 McCrackin Road
e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org Tallahassee, FL 32308
_-_-_-_-_-_- If you don't see what you want, just ask _-_-_-_-_-_-_-
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to email@example.com .