Re: APT [was Re: Is this really the right thing to do?]
> Before proceding with my proposal, let me define a term for packages
> that are installed for no other reason than to satisfy a dependency.
> I think 'Hooked' is a good word. It is a synonym for 'dependent', and
> it can lead to many good fishing analogies. ;)
A better word might be 'Wanted' (inverse of Hooked).
It might even be better to have it a string field, so the admin can note *why*
it was wanted - like this:
Wanted: for J. Random Luser's xyzzy project
Wanted: by /usr/local/bin/plugh
I think it would be a good idea if, before actually deleting packages, the
admin was shown their list and given a chance to mark any of them wanted.
To make this worthwhile, suite packages would then need to be produced. These
would be packages which contain almost no files, but recommend/suggest a bunch
of other packages (eg a "C development suite", recommending gcc, libc6-dev,
kernel-headers, etc and suggesting gdb, lint, prof). Most people would then
mostly select the suites, greatly reducing the number of packages they need to
come in contact with.