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

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:  dwarf@polaris.net     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
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .

Reply to: