Re: packaging pine
On Mon, Dec 10, 2001 at 01:18:19PM -0400, Ben Armstrong wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2001 at 12:05:52PM -0500, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > It's not a dependency, only a suggestion. So this is only display
> > information, not functionality, that's at stake (and in the case of
> > apt-get, it's not even that).
> You mean I could add "Suggests: ie5" to one of my packages and it would be
> perfectly policy-compliant?
Pretty much. It would suggest a virtual package that wasn't provided by
anything. But why would you do that?
If you re-read the thread, you'll find that I was the one proposing that
these suggestions be removed. Above, I was pointing out that very little
(or nothing) would be lost if these suggestions were removed, and it would
make it clearer that pine is not present when users try to apt-get install